socalfan Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Right. Tell that to the Falcons or Tampa or San Diego... NEXT... 462122[/snapback] This is kind of funny. How many yards did these teams throw for today? Hundreds... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 This is kind of funny. How many yards did these teams throw for today? Hundreds... 462144[/snapback] You should just stop now. You look like a fool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalfan Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Had we run the ball more there's a pretty good chance the Bills wouldn't have been losing in the 4th quarter... 462128[/snapback] Yeah...but in a backwards sort of way....We would run the ball more if we were winning. Since we weren't it just isn't feasible to look to the run to carry the team when it is behind. Consider last week, WM goes for 140 yds and we loose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalfan Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 You should just stop now. You look like a fool. 462148[/snapback] Look at the box scores. They win because they can pass. They run because they are winning. It doesn't happen the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 3, 2005 Author Share Posted October 3, 2005 Look at the box scores. They win because they can pass. The run because they are winning. It doesn't happen the other way around. 462163[/snapback] It doesn't? Did you not watch the previous two games vs. the Bills? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Yeah...but in a backwards sort of way....We would run the ball more if we were winning. Since we weren't it just isn't feasible to look to the run to carry the team when it is behind. Consider last week, WM goes for 140 yds and we loose. 462156[/snapback] You act like the Bills were behind big and didn't have time on the clock to run the ball. They should have been running the ball more, grinding out yards, controlling the clock and keeping the Saints offense off the field. All while moving the ball more consistently than we were doing attempting to throw the ball. I don’t know, moving the ball more consistently while keeping the opposing offense off the field…yeah, that sounds like a bad idea. Let’s keep throwing the ball since that was working so well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Look at the box scores. They win because they can pass. The run because they are winning. It doesn't happen the other way around. 462163[/snapback] Look, I totally disagree with you, that's obvious.....but just look at a team like Atlanta. I live down here and see almost all of their games. While Vick is better than most people on this board give him credit for, he's no Dan Marino or John Elway. The Falcons win because they can run and because they play solid defense. They ran all over us and they ran all over Minny today. There have even been games when Vick had more rushing yardage than passing yardage. They don't win because of the pass at ALL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalfan Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 It doesn't? Did you not watch the previous two games vs. the Bills? 462164[/snapback] Yeah, I see the Bills defense playing corners off the line of scrimmage. I see the defense with zone blitzes to stop a passing game, not a running game. I see the safeties sitting 10-15 yards down the field, protecting against the pass first. Do you not see the same thing? When you look at the defenses facing the Bills. They don't show that same pattern. They play the run, because the Bills cannot pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 When you look at the defenses facing the Bills. They don't show that same pattern. They play the run, because the Bills cannot pass. 462205[/snapback] Yet Willis still runs his asss off...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalfan Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 ........I don’t know, moving the ball more consistently while keeping the opposing offense off the field…yeah, that sounds like a bad idea. Let’s keep throwing the ball since that was working so well! 462167[/snapback] I think it sounds like a great idea....my point is this. It won't happen until the Bills can prove they can pass. Because if they can't pass, they won't be able to run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socalfan Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Yet Willis still runs his asss off...... 462210[/snapback] Yeah, I think Willis is an amazing back and if the Bills could pass then he would be on course of a 2000yd season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 We were down 6. It would have been a sound strategy. 462088[/snapback] You're right, and for several reasons! 1) It would have spelled our vaunted defense and given them some time to bring out that long-awaited A-game 2) Running gives the line confidence, and forces the defense to give some respect that in turn allows some pass plays to happen 3) McGahee deserved the ball there. Being down six is nothing. You gotta give the ball to the guy who puts you in the best position to win. Who else deserves that distinction right now on the Bills? Fast Freddie? Instead, they tried to do a number of different things that didn't work, looked demoralized, and were down by two scores the next time they took the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Look at the box scores. They win because they can pass. They run because they are winning. It doesn't happen the other way around. 462163[/snapback] OK, who let Rob Johnson register on here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 I think it sounds like a great idea....my point is this. It won't happen until the Bills can prove they can pass. Because if they can't pass, they won't be able to run. 462215[/snapback] They ran well in the Falcon game with no semblance of a pass attack. They ran well this game with no semblance of a pass attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mile High Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 When you have a RB that's gouging the opposition to the tune of 5 yards a pop, why stop it? this coaching staff could be ruining our young QB with their questionable judgement. 462070[/snapback] Hit the nail on ther head Joe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonInBuffalo Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Looking carefully over the Gamebook/statistics, I can pick out a few key reasons why the Bills lost today. - The offense was horrendous on 1st down. If you take out runs of 25 and 14 by McGahee (which obviously generated 1st downs) they averaged less than a yard on all their other 1st downs. That's what caused the offense to sputter. They weren't able to get managable down and distance. They did maintain a reasonable balance between running and passing plays, both on 1st down and overall. For the game, they had 23 running plays and 21 passing plays. When you consider that the last 5 plays were all passes, clearly they wanted to run the ball to take pressure off Losman and keep the defense off the field, but generally weren't effective at any of that. Out of their 11 possessions, they got more than one 1st down on only two of them. By comparison, the Saints had 3 or more 1st downs on 6 of their 11 possessions. - The defense gave up 7-15 on 3rd down. That's why the defense couldn't get off the field. Looking at the 3rd down distances, the Saints also did a better job of managing that. Out of 15 3rd downs, they had 7 or more to go only 6 times, 40%. By comparison, the Bills had 7 or more to go 6 out off their 11 times, about 55%. What's the answer? Other than stating the obvious, I don't know. The Bills need to do a better job of gaining positive yards on 1st and 2nd down (especially 1st) and the defense needs to do a better job of getting off the field on 3rd down. FYI, other than a few long runs, McGahee was not particularly effective today. Here are his runs: 25, -5, 2, 1, 1(TD), 2, 3, 1, 14, 3, 7, 5, 0, 40(-penalty), 0, -2 So, other than the 3 long runs, he gained 18 yards on 13 carries, if I added right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 I agree. The problem with this team is not that we run Willis too much. It is that we do not use him enough. He clearly is the best player on the offense. Yet, we take him out on nearly every third down. Willis runs with a lot of heart even when he is not getting the holes that the line should be giving him. It is too bad that we do not have a passing game to make his job easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 It's more than just him, too! I can't believe how many people keep saying we should pass, pass, pass, even though Willis is running his ass off! WTF??? lol 462143[/snapback] I blame Doug Flutie and that stupid-ass 5-wide empty backfield spread formation that everyone said was "using the pass to set up the run". Ever since then, the pass is supposed to come first... (And I still haven't figured out how that formation was "setting up the run" with an empty backfield. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 I think it sounds like a great idea....my point is this. It won't happen until the Bills can prove they can pass. Because if they can't pass, they won't be able to run. 462215[/snapback] You've never heard of the term "play-action pass", have you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted October 3, 2005 Author Share Posted October 3, 2005 FYI, other than a few long runs, McGahee was not particularly effective today. Here are his runs: 25, -5, 2, 1, 1(TD), 2, 3, 1, 14, 3, 7, 5, 0, 40(-penalty), 0, -2 So, other than the 3 long runs, he gained 18 yards on 13 carries, if I added right. 462301[/snapback] This is what happens in the running game, usually. Short runs the first 3 quarters, then they get a bit longer in the 4th. Only we never had a chance to SEE that because they passed a LOT on first down yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts