puente Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 So if McGahee fumbles, its the fault of the lineman who didnt block the guy who tackle him...........give me a break, players fumble not the offensive line.
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 We can't pin the loss squarely on you, but WTF was that last pass? 491147[/snapback] Yes, that last pass was his worst play of the game. But it also seemed the play itself was poorly designed, or else that the Patriots had called the right defense to stop it. Had Holcomb thrown into double coverage, chances are the pass would have been incomplete or intercepted. Despite all that, it was still a bad play on his part. But bear in mind this was only his 17th start. Also this is his first year in the Mike Mularkey offense, while Losman is in his second year. Any time Losman makes a mistake it's okay because he's a work in progress, but any time Holcomb messes up it's presumably the end of the world because he's supposedly finished learning. I personally believe that as Holcomb continues to absorb the nuances of the offense, develops chemistry with his receivers, and gains more experience through more starts, he will improve.
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 Then you havent watched a texans game or ever heard of david carr... 491195[/snapback] It's been a little while since I'd checked, and I'm willing to believe that Carr is now the most sacked.
JohnnyBravo Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 : Put anybody at QB, but cut this chicken sh-- coward Holcomb today 490816[/snapback] ok.. being noobish I hesitate to say much, but you didn't watch this game closely enough. The Bills lost because of the OC, NOT holcomb. The OC failed to call the long ball against the PAts #1 bugaboo. The OC failed to call the run when the Bills needed the critical first. The OC failed miserably. Dude, if you want to castrate someonone.. blame Mularkey for letting his OC call that shi_ _y game. The coaching staff is holding back this team. Belichick, Mangini and Mcdaniels had no problems outcoaching Bufflao today. That was a disgrace. That's what you should be mad at... NOT the players who did what they were told. That OC is as bad as cleveland's pretty freaking pathetic! ESPN did one thing right.. they told you why Buffalo is losing... because the OC has called a long pass play more than 20 yards in the air less than ANY OTHER TEAM IN THE NFL! With those receivers... WTF? fire this (*^*&%^$^#and get someone with some balls and some football sense
Ramius Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 Yes, that last pass was his worst play of the game. But it also seemed the play itself was poorly designed, or else that the Patriots had called the right defense to stop it. Had Holcomb thrown into double coverage, chances are the pass would have been incomplete or intercepted. Despite all that, it was still a bad play on his part. But bear in mind this was only his 17th start. Also this is his first year in the Mike Mularkey offense, while Losman is in his second year. Any time Losman makes a mistake it's okay because he's a work in progress, but any time Holcomb messes up it's presumably the end of the world because he's supposedly finished learning. I personally believe that as Holcomb continues to absorb the nuances of the offense, develops chemistry with his receivers, and gains more experience through more starts, he will improve. 491228[/snapback] Yah, we wouldnt want an interception on 4th down. That would lower noodle arm's passer rating. It was better off throwing the ball short of the marker and shrugging our shoulders saying golly gee...
e-dog Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 You idiot. The goal is to win a Super Bowl sometime in the near future, not to go 7-9 or even 9-7 now. 491219[/snapback] Some people on this board can't fiqure that out. They like to kiss ass and apologise for all of the Bills short comings. Everything is always good, when actually it's the opposite. Every draft pick was a great pick, TD walks on water when he's actually made a mess of this team, well they played good tonight, they only lost by five, the same players always underachieving but still get a pass. Please I'm sick of the loser mentality at ONE Bills Drive and with some on this board. Get a f-ing clue.
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 So if McGahee fumbles, its the fault of the lineman who didnt block the guy who tackle him...........give me a break, players fumble not the offensive line. 491225[/snapback] This particular comment doesn't strike me as too insightful. NFL teams typically try to throw the ball downfield from time to time. Typically, this is done by having the QB drop back, wait a reasonable amount of time for someone to get open, and eventually throw the ball away if the clock in his head expires with no one to throw to. The QB should throw the ball away more quickly if he sees someone about to get the sack. But it's often impossible for the QB to sense pressure from his blind side (hence the name). For that reason, defensive coordinators typically put their best pass rusher on the QB's blind side, knowing this is where he will do the most good. If a blindside pass rusher gets to the QB very quickly, he's likely to create a sack and a fumble. Maybe you knew all this already. But if so, you shouldn't have made your post.
Johnny Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 This particular comment doesn't strike me as too insightful. NFL teams typically try to throw the ball downfield from time to time. Typically, this is done by having the QB drop back, wait a reasonable amount of time for someone to get open, and eventually throw the ball away if the clock in his head expires with no one to throw to. The QB should throw the ball away more quickly if he sees someone about to get the sack. But it's often impossible for the QB to sense pressure from his blind side (hence the name). For that reason, defensive coordinators typically put their best pass rusher on the QB's blind side, knowing this is where he will do the most good. If a blindside pass rusher gets to the QB very quickly, he's likely to create a sack and a fumble. Maybe you knew all this already. But if so, you shouldn't have made your post. 491287[/snapback] some qb's just have a knack....theyre said to have "eyes in the back of their head".......winning qb's dont turn it over in that situation........not that losmans any better right now, but he hasnt proven it yet...holcomb has....we wont go far with him so why drag it out to 2008 to figure out losman may suck too...........too much invested, holcomb is expendable........its the salary cap era....we root for the uniform
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 Yah, we wouldnt want an interception on 4th down. That would lower noodle arm's passer rating. It was better off throwing the ball short of the marker and shrugging our shoulders saying golly gee... 491241[/snapback] My point was that none of the options available to Holcomb had a 50% chance or better of successfully converting the fourth down. If he throws it to Moulds, odds are the tackle will be made short of the first down marker. If he throws it to a guy who's double-covered, odds are strongly against a completion. The problem was exacerbated by the fact the one guy you'd typically count on the most to use his size to make a catch in double coverage was the one guy who wasn't past the first down marker. That comes back to Tom Clements having severely lost the chess match on that particular play.
tbonehawaii Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 A 55 yard pass is completed to Moulds; after that play not one pass attempt over 5 yards. With 4 and 7 the coward at quarterback throws a 4 yard pass; because he is such a friggin coward he is afraid of getting hit. Put anybody at QB, but cut this chicken sh-- coward Holcomb today 490816[/snapback] I assume this is a joke or you are drunk. nobody could be that much of a fooking idiot
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 some qb's just have a knack....theyre said to have "eyes in the back of their head".......winning qb's dont turn it over in that situation 491305[/snapback] You have a point about eyes in the back of your head. I'd agree that some QBs are better than others at sensing blindside pressure, but I've not heard of anyone who could do it perfectly. A "winning QB" looks a lot less impressive when the ten guys who surround him are getting outplayed. I remember the AFC Championship game between the Bills and the Chiefs. It was clear the Bills' defense as a whole was outplaying the Chiefs offense as a whole. Joe Montana was a winning QB if there ever was one, but he led his team to just two field goals in the first half. He didn't play in the second half due to a concussion. The Chiefs lost 30-13.
Dawgg Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 I agree with you. The worst play IMO was Holcomb's INT because he had his eyes set on Moulds before the play even started -- a dead giveaway as to where he was going with the ball. As for the sack and fumble, that was 100% the Offensive Line. My point was that none of the options available to Holcomb had a 50% or better of successfully converting the fourth down. If he throws it to Moulds, odds are the tackle will be made short of the first down marker. If he throws it to a guy who's double-covered, odds are strongly against a completion. The problem was exacerbated by the fact the one guy you'd typically count on the most to use his size to make a catch in double coverage was the one guy who wasn't past the first down marker. That comes back to Tom Clements having severely lost the chess match on that particular play. 491308[/snapback]
Johnny Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 You have a point about eyes in the back of your head. I'd agree that some QBs are better than others at sensing blindside pressure, but I've not heard of anyone who could do it perfectly. A "winning QB" looks a lot less impressive when the ten guys who surround him are getting outplayed. I remember the AFC Championship game between the Bills and the Chiefs. It was clear the Bills' defense as a whole was outplaying the Chiefs offense as a whole. Joe Montana was a winning QB if there ever was one, but he led his team to just two field goals in the first half. He didn't play in the second half due to a concussion. The Chiefs lost 30-13. 491317[/snapback] either way you could grade out the o lines as a tie tonight or give the edge to the bills for the ground game......... you probably do want your best athlete past the first down marker (scheme) but the good ones want to try and make a play even if its improvised......holcomb isnt gonna come up with many big plays..................he's got a chance to not lose games but he's not going to win many
Ralonzo Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 Look up, you're right. In fact Gandy stoned his guy.... 491185[/snapback] It depends on the blocking scheme who was supposed to take whom. That's one of those film room things we'll probably never know.
Ralonzo Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 Yes, that last pass was his worst play of the game. But it also seemed the play itself was poorly designed, or else that the Patriots had called the right defense to stop it. Had Holcomb thrown into double coverage, chances are the pass would have been incomplete or intercepted. 491228[/snapback] No offense, but when the alternative is turning it over on downs, who gives a sh*t? That's why it's such brain-diarrhea from Holcomb.
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 either way you could grade out the o lines as a tie tonight or give the edge to the bills for the ground game......... you probably do want your best athlete past the first down marker (scheme) but the good ones want to try and make a play even if its improvised......holcomb isnt gonna come up with many big plays..................he's got a chance to not lose games but he's not going to win many 491330[/snapback] Of the 13 starts Holcomb had before he came here, two of them were 400 yard games. I don't understand why there haven't been many big plays from Holcomb when he's been here, but his record clearly indicates he's capable of them.
Billsjunkie Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 Looked like Fat Bennie to me... can't double-check though, that game was quickly deleted from my DVR. 490933[/snapback] It was Bennie. Not Gandy.
East Brady Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 But, but, we might actually win FOUR games rather than TWO. Amazing how f*cking stupid some of the people that post here are. 490852[/snapback] And where are they NOW,,,CROW HERE ..........GET YOUR CROW HEEEEERRRRRRE!!!!!!!!!It's time for the crow salesman to step up to the plate ,,,,would all the crow eaters please step up to the plate ,,,,,,hot, medium, or mild we have it anyway you like ?????
East Brady Posted October 31, 2005 Posted October 31, 2005 .dont take him out unless u are officially calling the season a throw away..which would piss off every veteran in that locker room..and cause chaos...heck, i want to WIN..or at least have a chance...besides, how many times is clements going to be had by a pump fake...good lord..every ball that he was burned on came off a brady pump fake..its how the first td was scored..and the long throw over the middle that set up the pats at the 2...so when cooler heads prevail..i will say once again, holcomb was not the PRIMARY reason we lost 490893[/snapback] Most of the veterans in that locker room ARE LOSERS,,,in case you just tuned in..Maybe it's you that needs to pull your head out of the sand!!!!!!!! The veterans in that locker room are the PRIMARY reason we have lost all the games that were winnable,,,, in case you just tuned in!!
Recommended Posts