Ransom observations on the game

[Kelly the Dog]

You're a fine poster but you can get ridiculously defensive and stubborn at times.

Some of that is true, some of it is bull.  Yeah, the Dolphins helped us win last week. 

I could've sworn Tampa didn't do much vs. our defense in the 1st Qtr and I'm not sure what field position has to do with going 3 & out all the time.

Thinking that the play-calling was any better today than it was in any other game is incredible results-oriented hindsight thinking. 

Again, the turnovers had nothing to do with scoring 27 points today.

It is possible that we called some short passes with JP in there and he didn't execute them as well, unless I was imagining all of those 5 yard outs that looked like they were intended for a cheerleader.  For a WR to turn a 4 yard completion into a TD, somebody still has to get him the ball first.

477562[/snapback]

You dont know or watch much football if you dont think field position has a lot to do with going three and out. Especially in the Tampa game. I think the play-calling in todays game was far, far, far better than in other games. Running the ball and short, quick, low risk passes WAS supposed to be the plan. That is not what they called for JP. The turnovers having nothing to do with 27 points today is not only wrong but totally missing the point. If the Bills didnt score off turnovers today maybe that meant not taking advantage of turnovers. I am talking about turning around the momentum of the game, getting an extra series or two, getting better field postition (it SURE helped a lot in the Miami game). And JP wasnt missing a lot of 5 yard passes intended for a cheerleader, although there were a couple. He was missing 10 and 15 and 20 yard outs. Big difference.

[34-78-83]

I believe that having our regular O-line together again today (it hasnt been since week 1 vs the texans) makes a huge difference for whoever is playing QB.

477589[/snapback]

 

I agree with this. I've gone over the first half again and focussed on the running plays. The line consistently mauled the Jets defenders, especially in the B and C gaps. It was a pleasure to watch this line doing what they were intended to do from the start, and with Mike and Chris coming back in it made a huge difference. As in game one, Mike was left one on one with his man and took him completely out of the play on all the runs I saw to the right. Chris V often made it to the second level on plays and had great success, while Shelton (who had BY FAR his best game of the season) played cleanup through the hole and created a pivot point for Willis to get extra yards. Anderson was dominant on his side as well, getting a great up the filed surge, while Gandy sealed the edge on some successful breaks to the outside. Teague also got adequate push on short yardage plays enough to keep some drives alive.

[Dawgg]

I agree with you that Holcomb is not one of the top 10 QBs in the NFL and he certainly isn't blessed with amazing skills. But when are people going to stop whining and realize that the guy is getting it done? He's not a franchise QB but he's a QB that brings wins to this franchise. As a fan, that is what I want.

 

Qualifiying his TD passes as "plays that shouldn't have been TDs" is crazy-talk. All I need to know about Holcomb is that he executes the offense and moves the chains -- something that JP showed in spurts but not on a consistent basis. We could make a similar argument about how bad JP has been. Although he only has 2 or 3 interceptions, that number should be 7 or 8, given how many easy INTs the opposing corners dropped.

 

 

 

2. Holcomb, to me, is the equivalent of a starting pitcher in baseball with a 2-0 record and a 5.99 ERA. We gotta keep riding him but he really is a back-up for good reason. There are a few things he does quite well and he's done all he can do and has engineered two wins. So he needs to play. He has a rag for an arm, and I think he;s lost some velocity in the last year or two. He makes some really stupid plays that a 10 year vet should not make. For the second game in a row he threw a backwards idiotic pass and blew a handoff for a fumble, which ties an NFL record I believe. And in two games he''s thrown one pass more than ten yards in the air that has been good. This one, to Campbell, was a beaut. Neither of the TDs were great plays or throws, and neither should have been TDs, but they were and they count and again, he needs to play. He's doing exactly what he can do and needs to do and we can probably stay in the hunt with him. He is not an answer at all, however.

477514[/snapback]

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I felt that on a lot of those big run plays by Curtis Martin, Crowell was either totally enveloped by a blocker or caught out of position. I'd like to hear from someone who studies the game film--as my observation is based only on a few plays--but is Crowell partially to blame for our terrible run defense?

477525[/snapback]

 

 

I'm just back from Chicago and only got to do a quick look at the first half of today's great win so I will try to look a bit deeper and answer this question with some supportable detail later.

 

However, even without a thorough review I think your question about whether Crowell is partially the blame for our terrible run D can be answered accuratelt.

 

YES, he is deserves partial blame for the terrible run D, but it is such a small part it makes little sense that changing who plays this one position would make a big difference.

 

Specifically,

 

1. The run D sucked a lot before Crowell came in to play because of Spikes injury. Even with Pro Bowler Spikes in there against teams like TB and early in the game against AT before Spikes was hurt. Obviously Crowell deserves his fair share of the blame for the poor run D performance while he has been in the game, but to simply blame Crowell for the lack performance overall takes some ignoring of reality.

 

2. On one of Martin;s long runs yesterday one could clearly see Crowell effectively blocked and a great or even a good player does not allow this to happen. However, in addition to this, the DL was little more than a speed bump on this play, also Milloy was up on run support on this play and was not effective and seemed to be easily blocked out of the lane Martin took, so I think it is hard to lay blame on him for not being adequate to pick up for the failings of (at least) two other players with run stopping assignments on this play without also realizing that these two other players messed up on this play.

 

3. One thing I will really need to go back and try to look and see is that actually the broadcaster called out Nate Clements for being out of position on this play and being to close to the line to back-up his partners on this play. The question is raised up above whether the PI on Clements in the endzone was actually the boneheaded play referred to above. Despite the PI not being a very good play by Clements (particularly after McGee played the pass incredibly well just the play before) my guess is that it was Clements play on this run (or perhaps a McCarrein reception with Clements covering) which is the more likely faux pas referred to.

 

Overall, does Crowell deserve some blame? Definitely. Does he deserve the largest part of the blame? I think definitely not.

[Dawgg]

I have to go with BuffOrange here, Kelly.

 

Here's the thing -- you're right in the fact that JP didn't miss a lot of 5 yard outs.. that's because he rarely threw them. In order to execute such pass plays, a QB needs to be extremely accurate and have confidence to "thread the needle" so to speak. JP had no such confidence. All too often, when a short to intermediate route was called, JP would either end up scrambling, or just throw it out of bounds because the receiver wasn't "open enough."

 

Well guess what. In the NFL short routes, more often than not, dont involve wide open receivers standing on an island by themselves. Holcomb has shown he's more than adequate in executing these plays and his effectiveness has brought about a newfound confidence in the offense as a whole.

 

 

You dont know or watch much football if you dont think field position has a lot to do with going three and out. Especially in the Tampa game. I think the play-calling in todays game was far, far, far better than in other games. Running the ball and short, quick, low risk passes WAS supposed to be the plan. That is not what they called for JP. The turnovers having nothing to do with 27 points today is not only wrong but totally missing the point. If the Bills didnt score off turnovers today  maybe that meant not taking advantage of turnovers. I am talking about turning around the momentum of the game, getting an extra series or two, getting better field postition (it SURE helped a lot in the Miami game). And JP wasnt missing a lot of 5 yard passes intended for a cheerleader, although there were a couple. He was missing 10 and 15 and 20 yard outs. Big difference.

477598[/snapback]

[Fan in San Diego]

I agree with this. I've gone over the first half again and focussed on the running plays. The line consistently mauled the Jets defenders, especially in the B and C gaps. It was a pleasure to watch this line doing what they were intended to do from the start, and with Mike and Chris coming back in it made a huge difference. As in game one, Mike was left one on one with his man and took him completely out of the play on all the runs I saw to the right. Chris V often made it to the second level on plays and had great success, while Shelton (who had BY FAR his best game of the season) played cleanup through the hole and created a pivot point for Willis to get extra yards. Anderson was dominant on his side as well, getting a great up the filed surge, while Gandy sealed the edge on some successful breaks to the outside. Teague also got adequate push on short yardage plays enough to keep some drives alive.

477607[/snapback]

 

Yes sir, they moved the pile regularly today ! Something we have not seen yet all season.

[BuffOrange]

You dont know or watch much football if you dont think field position has a lot to do with going three and out. Especially in the Tampa game.

 

I give JP a mulligan for the Tampa game. He played horrible against a horsecrap Saints defense and a practice squad Atlanta secondary. Miami & Jets have a better defense than what both of those teams put on the field and it's not even really close.

 

I think the play-calling in todays game was far, far, far better than in other games.

 

It wasn't. Open your eyes.

 

Running the ball and short, quick, low risk passes WAS supposed to be the plan. That is not what they called for JP.

 

Yes it was. Open your eyes.

 

The turnovers having nothing to do with 27 points today is not only wrong but totally missing the point. If the Bills didnt score off turnovers today  maybe that meant not taking advantage of turnovers. I am talking about turning around the momentum of the game, getting an extra series or two, getting better field postition (it SURE helped a lot in the Miami game).

 

That's horsecrap. The Crowell int was a huge play, but getting the ball at our 18 yard line didn't put 7 points on the ball....moving the ball 82 yards gave us 7 points. That and the last turnover came with 3 minutes left when the Jets had no timeouts and we're trying to run out the clock. I'd love to know how that consititues as "not taking advantage of turnovers".

 

And JP wasnt missing a lot of 5 yard passes intended for a cheerleader, although there were a couple. He was missing 10 and 15 and 20 yard outs. Big difference.

477598[/snapback]

 

Watch games much?

 

I think we can agree that the defense won the Houston & Miami games with turnovers, and our QB didn't have to do much. Never minding the fact that Miami is much better than Houston, we can say those games cancel each other out.

Again I give JP a mulligan for the Tampa game.

This season is going to come down to winning those 'coin-flip' type games vs. the Jets/Falcons/Saints/Raiders/Panthers of the league. The Jets with their struggles not withstanding are a much better defense than the Saints, and even Atlanta given they played a 3rd string secondary against us.

I am done here because I feel like I'm arguing a Rob Johnson backer in 2000....they'll make any excuse they can just to try and show they weren't completely wrong even though they KNOW they're full of it; "Wah the running game", "Wah, the opponent", "Wah, the defense", "Wah, the playcalling", "Wah, wah, wah".

[Simon]

a horsecrap 3rd string secondary vs. Atlanta .......... and even Atlanta given they played a 3rd string secondary against us.

You keep saying this but it simply isn't true. Except for a few series where DeAngelo Hall was getting his shoulder checked out, teh Falcons had 3/4 of their starting secondary on the field. So that "3rd string secondary" you keep harping about was actually only missing 1 starter. It's like saying the Bills would be sporting a 3rd string secondary if Kevin Thomas was in for Terrence McGee.

[BuffOrange]

You keep saying this but it simply isn't true. Except for a few series where DeAngelo Hall was getting his shoulder checked out, teh Falcons had 3/4 of their starting secondary on the field. So that "3rd string secondary" you keep harping about was actually only missing 1 starter. It's like saying the Bills would be sporting a 3rd string secondary if Kevin Thomas was in for Terrence McGee. 

477709[/snapback]

 

I really don't think that's correct.

[Kelly the Dog]

I agree with you that Holcomb is not one of the top 10 QBs in the NFL and he certainly isn't blessed with amazing skills.  But when are people going to stop whining and realize that the guy is getting it done?  He's not a franchise QB but he's a QB that brings wins to this franchise.  As a fan, that is what I want.

 

Qualifiying his TD passes as "plays that shouldn't have been TDs" is crazy-talk.  All I need to know about Holcomb is that he executes the offense and moves the chains -- something that JP showed in spurts but not on a consistent basis.  We could make a similar argument about how bad JP has been.  Although he only has 2 or 3 interceptions, that number should be 7 or 8, given how many easy INTs the opposing corners dropped.

477608[/snapback]

What part of "Neither of the TDs were great plays or throws, and neither should have been TDs, but they were and they count and again, he needs to play. He's doing exactly what he can do and needs to do and we can probably stay in the hunt with him." did you not understand? That they were touchdowns and they count and he needs to play and he's doing what he needs to do and we can win with him and we can stay in the hunt with him? It didn't say they shouldnt count, I said they did count and that's all that matters. And I said he is getting it done, and I didnt say that JP should be playing now.

[Simon]

I really don't think that's correct.

477712[/snapback]

 

You can "think" whatever you want but DeAngelo Hall, Bryan Scott and Keion Carpenter were all on the field for most of the game, with only Hall missing a few series in the 2nd qrtr while they checked out his shoulder before he returned to play the rest of the game.

So regardless of what you think, the fact of the matter is that all but 1 player in the Falcons secondary were their regular first string starters.

[nick in* england]

I would add that the runs all come over Aaron Schobel... they are consistently exposing AS as a weak spot in our run game.

[Kelly the Dog]

I really don't think that's correct.

477712[/snapback]

That's because you're continually talking out of your ass, like saying that JP was passing and missing as many 3 and 5 yard outs as he was 10 and 15 and 20 yard outs, and the play-calling was the same for him as KH.

 

NFL gamebook usually lists the spot on the field that the incomplete pass is thrown. For some reason, in the NO and Tampa game they didn't. You can look it up. I was going to list all three games. But they did list the Falcon game. Here is how far Losman's incompletions went, every single one of them:

 

44

45

13

13

4 over the middle

7

34

13

14

50

52

5

6

17 int

9

41

 

I guess it was all those three step drops and quick outs and slants that they called where he dropped back 5 and 7 steps and threw it 40 or 50 yards instead of 4 and 5.

[BuffOrange]

You can "think" whatever you want but DeAngelo Hall, Bryan Scott and Keion Carpenter were all on the field for most of the game, with only Hall missing a few series in the 2nd qrtr while they checked out his shoulder before he returned to play the rest of the game.

So regardless of what you think, the fact of the matter is that all but 1 player in the Falcons secondary were their regular first string starters.

477730[/snapback]

 

Then what was with the announcer saying every 5 minutes: "And here comes ANOTHER guy who wasn't even on the practice squad 2 weeks ago into the game"?

In any case the Jets defense is as good as Atlanta's, and I think they'll prove it a week from tonight.

[BuffOrange]

That's because you're continually talking out of your ass, like saying that JP was passing and missing as many 3 and 5 yard outs as he was 10 and 15 and 20 yard outs, and the play-calling was the same for him as KH.

 

Or like saying "the turnovers helped us score points yesterday" or like "the offense didn't take advantage of the turnovers they got yesterday". Yeah, that's accurate.

Also, some NFL teams have been known to send more than one WR out on a route and the QB actually has options as to where he wants to throw the ball. Hard to believe, I know.

Defenses also gameplan differently for different QB's. It's possible that those WR screens are available more with Kelly in there. That doesn't mean the offensive playcalling is any different either. A lot of those are called at the LOS when the CB is playing off.

God you're full of yourself.

[VABills]

I felt that on a lot of those big run plays by Curtis Martin, Crowell was either totally enveloped by a blocker or caught out of position. I'd like to hear from someone who studies the game film--as my observation is based only on a few plays--but is Crowell partially to blame for our terrible run defense?

477525[/snapback]

You're correct. The problem is Crowell cannot shed blocks like Flecther and Spikes can. Therefore, the stunting that Adams does, put a clear blocker on Crowell and allows the RB to get major yardage if Adams misses.

[GG]

You're correct.  The problem is Crowell cannot shed blocks like Flecther and Spikes can.  Therefore, the stunting that Adams does, put a clear blocker on Crowell and allows the RB to get major yardage if Adams misses.

477755[/snapback]

 

Gray may need to rethink the strategy of having Adams shoot into the backfield on running downs. Anderson continues to be blown off plays by a single G or C, leaving no one in space between the line of scrimmage and the secondary. Not that it was much different than when Edwards in there. Take a look at the long runs that Dunn & Cadillac sprang on us.

 

I'm going to violate my cardinal rule, and propose a trade. Since Raiders seem destine to go nowhere, I would seriously consider throwing a 6th rounder to them to get Big Ted back. Even at 90, he's still an immovable force that would immediately bring this D back to respectability. Then, a realistic shot at the playoffs, and maybe even a victory is not out of the question.

[dib]

I'm not reu if he was every really that elusive; and it oges without saying that making the kind of guys on UM's schedule miss is a hell of a lot different than making pro defenders miss.

 

What?

And what do you mean by "The kind of guys on UM's schedule" Do you even know what their schedule is?

[VABills]

Gray may need to rethink the strategy of having Adams shoot into the backfield on running downs.  Anderson continues to be blown off plays by a single G or C, leaving no one in space between the line of scrimmage and the secondary.  Not that it was much different than when Edwards in there.  Take a look at the long runs that Dunn & Cadillac sprang on us.

 

I'm going to violate my cardinal rule, and propose a trade.  Since Raiders seem destine to go nowhere, I would seriously consider throwing a 6th rounder to them to get Big Ted back.  Even at 90, he's still an immovable force that would immediately bring this D back to respectability.  Then, a realistic shot at the playoffs, and maybe even a victory is not out of the question.

477763[/snapback]

How about trading with Houston for Seth Payne. They are going nowhere, he has very limited ability, but he can play the run.

[ganesh]

11. I may be in the minority, and it's impossible to say, but I still think we win both of these games with JP at quarterback. If we ran Willis and had success and got turnovers and great field position and didnt put him in terrible positions, he would have fared a lot better. KH does several things that JP can't do yet that may have been difference makers, and seemed to make a pass when he had to, but he makes as many mistakes as Losman. I do think we need to play KH until he loses though, it's like going with a hot goaltender in hockey.

 

477514[/snapback]

 

I feel the same way....Two home games...against two avg. division teams...

KH barely did the right things (for a veteran) and the Running game,

Defense and STs came up big.....Losman was 1-1 at home and 0-2 on the

road and two of those losses were against tough teams (Atl and Tampa Bay).

 

The next two road games will tell how good Holcomb is....He almost lost the

game for us yesterday with those two interceptions....