Mark VI Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 That is how you win games. Kicking the teeth out of your opponents on Offense. You think TD would understand this better than anyone. Yet after Mike Williams, he goes cheap on the OL. Then he hired Mularkey who prefers gadget plays and abhors physical football ( even though he told us different ). I can't make sense of this. We literally need 4 new O Lineman, outside of Williams. How the hell can TD not see this ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 How the hell can TD not see this ? 485484[/snapback] Blind, deaf and dumb ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 That is how you win games. Kicking the teeth out of your opponents on Offense. You think TD would understand this better than anyone. Yet after Mike Williams, he goes cheap on the OL. Then he hired Mularkey who prefers gadget plays and abhors physical football ( even though he told us different ). I can't make sense of this. We literally need 4 new O Lineman, outside of Williams. How the hell can TD not see this ? 485484[/snapback] I had a chance to see one of their drives: 9 plays, 80 yard, 7 runs, 2 passes...one of them a simple play action for six. They executed it perfectly. And then they lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BenchBledsoe Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 That is how you win games. Kicking the teeth out of your opponents on Offense. You think TD would understand this better than anyone. Yet after Mike Williams, he goes cheap on the OL. Then he hired Mularkey who prefers gadget plays and abhors physical football ( even though he told us different ). I can't make sense of this. We literally need 4 new O Lineman, outside of Williams. How the hell can TD not see this ? 485484[/snapback] TD went cheap on the O-Line WITH M. Williams, just not the way he expected! And yes, I despised the MM hiring. Gadget plays that make Gilbride look conservative. In Buffalo, a blue collar town, we need someone like John Fox, who loves to run and play D. (when his personnel have allowed) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Blind, deaf and dumb ? 485487[/snapback] i want to be a ref . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 i want to be a ref . 485492[/snapback] You'd look good in stripes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 You'd look good in stripes. 485498[/snapback] make me look thiner . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 That is how you win games. Kicking the teeth out of your opponents on Offense. You think TD would understand this better than anyone. Yet after Mike Williams, he goes cheap on the OL. Then he hired Mularkey who prefers gadget plays and abhors physical football ( even though he told us different ). I can't make sense of this. We literally need 4 new O Lineman, outside of Williams. How the hell can TD not see this ? 485484[/snapback] Mike, Big Bennie and Trey vs Marvel, Alan, and Jeff. Hmmm........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Chipper Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Agreed. The Stellers are a team that shoves it down your throaton both sides of the ball. They know it, their fans know it and their opponents know it. The Bills are nothing like the Steelers- we claim to be a smash mouth team and sometimes we are during a game but it never lasts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Agreed. The Stellers are a team that shoves it down your throaton both sides of the ball. They know it, their fans know it and their opponents know it. The Bills are nothing like the Steelers- we claim to be a smash mouth team and sometimes we are during a game but it never lasts. 485525[/snapback] we are a smashmouth team. we get smashed in the mouth and kicked in the teeth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 However, we would be JUST as unhappy with Fox and Cowher as neither has brought home a championship to their cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 However, we would be JUST as unhappy with Fox and Cowher as neither has brought home a championship to their cities. 485545[/snapback] i would be happy till the playoffs . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 That is how you win games. Kicking the teeth out of your opponents on Offense. Just be sure you don't get a bloody nose when you try to kick the teeth out of your opponents? You figure Steelers would get a TD in two rushing tries from the 2? That's why that comparison isn't totally useful. You think TD would understand this better than anyone. Yet after Mike Williams, he goes cheap on the OL. Then he hired Mularkey who prefers gadget plays and abhors physical football ( even though he told us different ). I can't make sense of this. We literally need 4 new O Lineman, outside of Williams. How the hell can TD not see this ? 485484[/snapback] Shall we rewind the time machine and see if TD passed up Pro-Bowlers in subsequent drafts? To me, it's more along the lines that there was very little talent available in FA, and Bills' pickups haven't performed as expected that's causing this. Do you think that if TD would have been able to add DeMulling in the offseason it would have made the OL situation that much better, with the entire right side in shambles due to injury? Didn't we cover the history of "gadget play" Mike before? Gadget Play Mike's Steelers were #1 in rushing attempts in '01 and #3 in '02. Interestingly, Steelers were also #2 in rushing attempts under Gilbride in '00, but their offense was putrid. You can draw a parallel to '03, when Steelers' rush numbers dropped significantly because of injuries & shuffling of the offensive line. But let's have a few trick plays involving Antwan Randle EL cloud our memories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted October 25, 2005 Author Share Posted October 25, 2005 Just be sure you don't get a bloody nose when you try to kick the teeth out of your opponents? You figure Steelers would get a TD in two rushing tries from the 2? That's why that comparison isn't totally useful.Shall we rewind the time machine and see if TD passed up Pro-Bowlers in subsequent drafts? To me, it's more along the lines that there was very little talent available in FA, and Bills' pickups haven't performed as expected that's causing this. Do you think that if TD would have been able to add DeMulling in the offseason it would have made the OL situation that much better, with the entire right side in shambles due to injury? Didn't we cover the history of "gadget play" Mike before? Gadget Play Mike's Steelers were #1 in rushing attempts in '01 and #3 in '02. Interestingly, Steelers were also #2 in rushing attempts under Gilbride in '00, but their offense was putrid. You can draw a parallel to '03, when Steelers' rush numbers dropped significantly because of injuries & shuffling of the offensive line. But let's have a few trick plays involving Antwan Randle EL cloud our memories. 485594[/snapback] Then why did Mularkey preach a tough physical running game ? Did he bail, not believing in the OL ? How did Willis get any yards this year ? Or did he bail because he doesn't have a HC like Cowher telling him " I want to run most of the time " ? Maybe more of the cute crap is what he wanted all along. I wish he still had someone to order him " Run the F#*king ball ". This OL cannot pass protect . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted October 25, 2005 Author Share Posted October 25, 2005 However, we would be JUST as unhappy with Fox and Cowher as neither has brought home a championship to their cities. 485545[/snapback] I don't want Cowher here. I want to emulate his philosophy, which has been around for decades. Run the ball and control the clock. That also helps keep our own bad Defense off the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 Jerry Gray and Tom Clements are poor coordinators that can't get the most out of their players. They've regressed this year. Gray is a one trick pony - blitz, blitz, blitz. "Hey, have I blitzed my way into a Head Coaching job someplace yet?" And Clements is confused. His game plans read like a 5th grader's essay on the UN. "It's in New York and all the countries have people that go there and speak." Hey, if Herm Edwards can get new coordinators every year, why can't MM? Herm's not the only one - but it easily comes to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 Then why did Mularkey preach a tough physical running game ? Did he bail, not believing in the OL ? How did Willis get any yards this year ? Or did he bail because he doesn't have a HC like Cowher telling him " I want to run most of the time " ? Maybe more of the cute crap is what he wanted all along. I wish he still had someone to order him " Run the F#*king ball ". This OL cannot pass protect . 485767[/snapback] I think a quote may have been attributed to Dan Henning when he was last seen tossed over the Peace Bridge for the offensive showings on Sundays, "You can't make chicken salad out of chicken stevestojan." Could that logic apply to this OL? This is still a run first team, as evidenced by the stats - Bills are #5 in rushes and #7 in rush yds. Willis is #2 in rushes & #5 in yds (I haven't done comps to take out the bye weeks) Are we really talking about a philosophy that doesn't preach run first, or is it more fundamental that this team isn't putting points on the board, and the porous defense is allowing too many? To me it seems more of an isuse if execution than design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 I think a quote may have been attributed to Dan Henning when he was last seen tossed over the Peace Bridge for the offensive showings on Sundays, "You can't make chicken salad out of chicken stevestojan." Could that logic apply to this OL? This is still a run first team, as evidenced by the stats - Bills are #5 in rushes and #7 in rush yds. Willis is #2 in rushes & #5 in yds (I haven't done comps to take out the bye weeks) Are we really talking about a philosophy that doesn't preach run first, or is it more fundamental that this team isn't putting points on the board, and the porous defense is allowing too many? To me it seems more of an isuse of execution than design. 485859[/snapback] Execution? I'm in favor of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Rich Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 Execution? I'm in favor of that. 485864[/snapback] I thought you were dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 I thought you were dead. 485934[/snapback] In Brad Riter's eye's I am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts