Jump to content

Why is your franchise receiver out in the flat


Recommended Posts

There is no reason that any receiver should have been inside 7 yards.  The only one that should have been closer would be an outlet receiver such as Shelton (if he was even in there, I don't recall), not your No. 1 guy.  Every other receiver should have been beyond 7 yards out.  Terrible play call and terrible play by Holcomb to not realize you must throw it beyond 7, even if it risks an INT.

492159[/snapback]

 

It's not unreasonable to expect the defense to play off enough that a receiver could catch a six-yard pass and get the extra yard on his own.

 

Five yards is a bit much, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

He ran past the corner and would have been wide open if not for the safety who rotated over there after the snap, according to Holcomb.  If the safety doesn't roll to Roscoe, Holcomb was going to go there, but the safety ended up drifting directly to the spot he was going to throw the ball.  I just don't see where it's a bad idea.

 

As for the rest of your post, I can't say I disagree.  I was hoping they'd have McGahee as a 1 or 2 receiving option because, like you inferenced, he's a major threat in the open field.

492171[/snapback]

 

Perhaps having Moulds 10 yards downfield as opposed to 2 would have occupied that safety's attention for a second longer...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not unreasonable to expect the defense to play off enough that a receiver could catch a six-yard pass and get the extra yard on his own.

 

Five yards is a bit much, though.

492183[/snapback]

Yeah, I realize that. I'm still pissed that it was that short and what he was expected to do. If not 7 yards out, he should been a few yards closer to the first down marker. At least within a body length where he may be able to stretch out and get the first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps having Moulds 10 yards downfield as opposed to 2 would have occupied that safety's attention for a second longer...

492185[/snapback]

Perhaps, if they hadn't been on totally opposite sides of the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i really cant believe you are DEFENDING a 2 yard pass on 4th and 7.  :(

492216[/snapback]

I'm not defending a called 2-yard pass. I'm attacking 'tards for going after Clements when they haven't a clue - Clements didn't call a 2-yard pass.

 

I'm attacking 'tards who blast Holcomb for making the best read he could. He says Moulds was the only open guy and he tried to get him the ball to make a play.

 

If Moulds slips a tackle he got the first and it's a brilliant call. But he didn't, and now the coaches are idiots. Sorry. I've been around too long to buy into that line of thinking, but please, carry on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not defending a called 2-yard pass.  I'm attacking 'tards for going after Clements when they haven't a clue - Clements didn't call a 2-yard pass.

 

I'm attacking 'tards who blast Holcomb for making the best read he could.  He says Moulds was the only open guy and he tried to get him the ball to make a play.

 

If Moulds slips a tackle he got the first and it's a brilliant call.  But he didn't, and now the coaches are idiots.  Sorry.  I've been around too long to buy into that line of thinking, but please, carry on...

492351[/snapback]

 

But Clements called a pass. Of course, a pass was called for, it being 4th and 8. But then, the reason it was 4th and 8 was because Clements called a pass before that, and a pass before that, and before that, and before that...

 

Again, you've got five and a half minutes left, you're averaging 4 yards a carry, you're down by one score. Don't !@#$ing dance with 'em, shove the ball down their throats! :( Clements is a dolt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Clements called a pass.  Of course, a pass was called for, it being 4th and 8.  But then, the reason it was 4th and 8 was because Clements called a pass before that, and a pass before that, and before that, and before that... 

 

Again, you've got five and a half minutes left, you're averaging 4 yards a carry, you're down by one score.  Don't !@#$ing dance with 'em, shove the ball down their throats!  :(  Clements is a dolt.

492356[/snapback]

But here's my point: If those passes were successful and Bflo got a couple of first downs, then he's a creative risk-taker who sensed when the Pats were down. If he gives the ball too McGahee but he gets stuffed, he's running an offense that's too predictable.

 

Hindsight is 20/20, but it doesn't mean that all of the Monday morning QBs (you and me included) know more about Bflo's offensive tendancies and the Pats' defensive tendencies at any given point in time than the Bills' coaches do.

 

I'm of the opinion that it's much easier to sleep on it, read the post game articles, and start popping off on a message board than it is to choose the play and get it to the QB within 10 seconds. But that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Clements called a pass.  Of course, a pass was called for, it being 4th and 8.  But then, the reason it was 4th and 8 was because Clements called a pass before that, and a pass before that, and before that, and before that... 

 

Again, you've got five and a half minutes left, you're averaging 4 yards a carry, you're down by one score.  Don't !@#$ing dance with 'em, shove the ball down their throats!  :(  Clements is a dolt.

492356[/snapback]

 

 

Well, to be fair, I give the guy at least a little credit since we started that drive with 4 straight runs. Problem was, once we got inside their 40 yard line, there goes the running game. It's like, you've gotta be kidding me. They can't stop the run. Whatever happens, you DON'T want to give Brady any time on the clock to do anything. Is the conclusion from this anything other than "keep running the ball, you f!@% tard? Run the ball, keep running it, and after that run some more. Even Shaud was running well, so if Willis needs a breather you're still okay. Just run the f!%@$ing ball. It's killing me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not defending a called 2-yard pass.  I'm attacking 'tards for going after Clements when they haven't a clue - Clements didn't call a 2-yard pass.

 

I'm attacking 'tards who blast Holcomb for making the best read he could.  He says Moulds was the only open guy and he tried to get him the ball to make a play.

 

If Moulds slips a tackle he got the first and it's a brilliant call.  But he didn't, and now the coaches are idiots.  Sorry.  I've been around too long to buy into that line of thinking, but please, carry on...

492351[/snapback]

 

Campy, you're missing everyone's point, man. Why did Clements have to call the pass play that utilizes Moulds as a 2-yard safety outlet?

 

I can't speak for everyone, but I wasn't blaming Holcomb. If he really thought that's all that was open, he's got to hit him. He's clearly not a scrambler, and a sack is a big no-no in that situation. So if that's it, Moulds was the final option, than give it to him.

 

Don't tell me Clements didn't call the play. Perhaps it's not designed to go to Moulds, but the fact is, there is the option to go to Moulds. Why not call another play/formation where Moulds runs a route that is at least five yards downfield? He didn't have any trouble getting open for his other catches. Take out the 55-yarder and the two-yarder, and Moulds still caught 7 passes for 68 yards (9.7 avg.)

 

You're a little sensitive about Holcomb pal. It would have been great on 3rd and 7 for him to go through his progressions and dump it off. But to lob it out for 2 yards on 4th down makes me wonder what he's been watching in his 10 NFL seasons. Throw it to Roscoe and get picked, and we are not having this conversation. I guarantee nobody would have said "Well, Moulds was open on the left side at the line of scrimmage."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Campy, you're missing everyone's point, man.  Why did Clements have to call the pass play that utilizes Moulds as a 2-yard safety outlet?

492391[/snapback]

I don't know. Maybe because the defense realized he was breaking the game open had started double-teaming him?

 

I guess part of my frustration was that I just realized nobody here listens to the post game press conferences. Moulds said he was used out there to draw triple coverage. He ran it short to keep the deeper guys from being able to make the play on the pass to Roscoe. As it turns out, Holcomb felt like his best chance of getting the first was to throw it to Moulds to let him make a play. It is what it is, and there's still no use crying over spilled milk.

 

And you know, I may be missing everyone's point -- Hell, I missed everyone's point in the "Bills will lose by 40" threads. I'll consider it a blessing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess there are zero plays in the arsenal that call for all the receivers to run patterns deeper than 8 yards.

492439[/snapback]

 

Exactly. That's all I'm saying.

 

That's great they wanted to use Moulds as a decoy, but the bottom line is he is still out there as a receiver. Why not use him as a decoy on a 10-yard route, so that should something tragic happen where you are forced to throw to your #1 receiver, at least he is in a position to pick up the first down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But here's my point: If those passes were successful and Bflo got a couple of first downs, then he's a creative risk-taker who sensed when the Pats were down.  If he gives the ball too McGahee but he gets stuffed, he's running an offense that's too predictable.

 

Hindsight is 20/20, but it doesn't mean that all of the Monday morning QBs (you and me included) know more about Bflo's offensive tendancies and the Pats' defensive tendencies at any given point in time than the Bills' coaches do.

 

I'm of the opinion that it's much easier to sleep on it, read the post game articles,  and start popping off on a message board than it is to choose the play and get it to the QB within 10 seconds.  But that's just me.

492366[/snapback]

 

bull sh--. IF those passes were successful and Buffalo got a couple of first downs, then Clements is still an idiot who abandoned the run at the worst possible time to prove how smart and clever he was. It's the same reason everybody laughs at Mike Martz, even when he wins.

 

And bollocks on "Monday Morning QBing" nonsense; I was hopping mad about this last night, when he started airing it out on second and six with five and a half minutes left. Like I said earlier: 31 teams in the league know you run the ball down their throats at that point. Most of the viewers know that. The only people that don't are: Clements, because he's "clever", and you, because you apparently value "clever" over wins.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bull sh--.  IF those passes were successful and Buffalo got a couple of first downs, then Clements is still an idiot who abandoned the run at the worst possible time to prove how smart and clever he was.  It's the same reason everybody laughs at Mike Martz, even when he wins.
But you're cool with it if Willis gets stuffed 3 times because the Pats put 9 men in the box?

 

And bollocks on "Monday Morning QBing" nonsense; I was hopping mad about this last night, when he started airing it out on second and six with five and a half minutes left.  Like I said earlier: 31 teams in the league know you run the ball down their throats at that point.  Most of the viewers know that.  The only people that don't are: Clements, because he's "clever", and you, because you apparently value "clever" over wins.

492564[/snapback]

Like I said, "I'm of the opinion..." Hindsight is 20/20, and it's easier to critique than do it - it's why critics are critics and not recording artists, painters, and football players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...