Buckeye Eric Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 Yep, you are the only one who thinks this draft couldn't have gotten any worse... The rest of us will wait 3 years before passing judgement.
CircleTheWagons Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 We are running a cover-2 defense, which utilizes smaller quicker DT's. DT's that are in the 300 lb range 681233[/snapback] I love those small 300 lb guys that are light on their feet I agree with you, but I find it amazing that an athlete can be considered small at 300 lbs.
eball Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 "2004 Patriots pass defense: 212.5 yds/game, 18 TDs against, 20 picks2005 Patriots pass defense: 231.4 yds/game, 25 TDs against, 10 picks" And yet they did this with street FAs and 4th stringers. We'd all be jumping for joy if the bills were defending the pass like that. So now you're gonna tell me it was their DB talent that produced numbers like that? And I was responding to YOUR reference to the fact that the Squeelers have the best SS in the game. Blown out of the water my ass. NEXT! 681529[/snapback] Joe, you're really starting to sound pathetic. 2005 Buffalo pass defense: 205.7 yds/game, 19 TDs against, 17 picks. I don't see anyone jumping for joy. As for the 2005 Pats...do you think coaching and schemes have anything to do with the success or failure of a defense? I would suggest to you that the Pats' secondary would have been even worse last year if not for the coaching ability of Belechick et al; and it wasn't "good" as is. Just give it up already and find a new team. You're obviously so depressed and disheartened by the Bills that they no longer deserve your support. We'll fight the good fight without you. PWNED!
syhuang Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 "2004 Patriots pass defense: 212.5 yds/game, 18 TDs against, 20 picks2005 Patriots pass defense: 231.4 yds/game, 25 TDs against, 10 picks" And yet they did this with street FAs and 4th stringers. We'd all be jumping for joy if the bills were defending the pass like that. So now you're gonna tell me it was their DB talent that produced numbers like that? And I was responding to YOUR reference to the fact that the Squeelers have the best SS in the game. Blown out of the water my ass. NEXT! 681529[/snapback] Since when street FAs and 4th stringers are not qualified for "anyone"?? If you couldn't be consistent in your statements, you don't deserve any credibility. Let alone question others'. You said: "with a solid D front, you can plug just about anyone back in the defensive backfield and experience success." And then eat your own words: "And yet they did this with street FAs and 4th stringers." Be consistent. Did you ever respond to the impact of Harrison on 2004 and 2005 Pats teams? What a nice way to avoid the question you couldn't answer.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 Just give it up already and find a new team. You're obviously so depressed and disheartened by the Bills that they no longer deserve your support. We'll fight the good fight without you. 681563[/snapback] Well, now that I have the permission of the final arbiter of fandom.... Thanks for playing. Yet AGAIN you've proven what I'm saying. They posted those numbers with NOBODIES in the secondary, whereas we had a McGee, Clements, Milloy and Vincent back there. But time and again on third and long, we would give up the first down due to a lack of front four pressure...and this is not a new development in Buffalo, either. Please feel free to return to the conversation when you learn something about defensive fooball.
Ghost of BiB Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 I love those small 300 lb guys that are light on their feet I agree with you, but I find it amazing that an athlete can be considered small at 300 lbs. 681542[/snapback] Times have changed.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 "with a solid D front, you can plug just about anyone back in the defensive backfield and experience success." And then eat your own words: "And yet they did this with street FAs and 4th stringers." 681568[/snapback] How cool, I have a stalker! This is entirely consistent, oh brilliant one. h They indeed plugged ANYONE and just about EVERYONE into that defensive backfield last season, and had a defense good enough to make it to the secondround of the playoffs. Nice, huh? Their DTs and DEs not to mention solid linebacking more than made up for a pretty talent-less secondary. Marv seems hell-bent on building a defense in a reverse fashion, stocking the backfield and hoping for production up front. History shows that approach isn't usually successful. And as far as Harrison, did he even PLAY last year? ddin't he get hurt in week 2 or 3?
syhuang Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 How cool, I have a stalker! stalker?? you think too much. It's not too hard to notice your inconsistent statements just few posts apart. This is entirely consistent, oh brilliant one. h They indeed plugged ANYONE and just about EVERYONE into that defensive backfield last season, and had a defense good enough to make it to the secondround of the playoffs. Nice, huh? Their DTs and DEs not to mention solid linebacking more than made up for a pretty talent-less secondary. Marv seems hell-bent on building a defense in a reverse fashion, stocking the backfield and hoping for production up front. History shows that approach isn't usually successful. And as far as Harrison, did he even PLAY last year? ddin't he get hurt in week 2 or 3? 681577[/snapback] And you happened to think Harrison's injury has nothing to do with their pass defense? Show you the numbers again: 2004 Patriots pass defense (with Harrison): 212.5 yds/game, 18 TDs against, 20 picks 2005 Patriots pass defense (without Harrison): 231.4 yds/game, 25 TDs against, 10 picks What's the same in their defenses in 2004 and 2005? The "street FA and 4th stringers" you referred. Wahts' the difference? Harrison. Get the point. and be consistent.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 And you happened to think Harrison's injury has nothing to do with their pass defense? Show you the numbers again: 2004 Patriots pass defense (with Harrison): 212.5 yds/game, 18 TDs against, 20 picks 2005 Patriots pass defense (without Harrison): 231.4 yds/game, 25 TDs against, 10 picks What's the same in their defenses in 2004 and 2005? The "street FA and 4th stringers" you referred. 681592[/snapback] Can you read? They indeed plugged ANYONE and just about EVERYONE into that defensive backfield last season, and had a defense good enough to make it to the secondround of the playoffs. The fact of the matter is, their pass defense was good enough to win their division and win a playoff game. And they did it with warm bodies in the defensive backfield. How'd they manage to do that? huh? Can you explain that? Think the Bills could have done that? Man, are you thick. Lay off the pot. It's killing you. Oh, and you missed this too... And as far as Harrison, did he even PLAY last year? didn't he get hurt in week 2 or 3?
syhuang Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 You still haven't answered the impact of Harrison on Pats 2004 and 2005 pass defenses. It's pretty smart to keep avoiding the question you can't answer. Don't try to shift the focus to only 2005 pass defense or try to compare Bills and Pats defenses. The point is the difference between Pats 2004 and 2005 pass defenses. And the difference is Harrison, not "street FA and 4th stringers". This proves your 'anyboy' theory is totally wrong.
GG Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 The fact of the matter is, their pass defense was good enough to win their division and win a playoff game. And they did it with warm bodies in the defensive backfield. 681602[/snapback] Methinks the fact that they played in a division with Bills, Jets & Dolphins was a bigger contributor to their title in '05, than any point you're trying to make in this thread.
eball Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 And as far as Harrison, did he even PLAY last year? ddin't he get hurt in week 2 or 3? 681577[/snapback] LOL. Thanks for unwittingly proving my point.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 LOL. Thanks for unwittingly proving my point. 681633[/snapback] if your point was Harrison made them a better defense, then yeah, rock on. Put Harrison on our "no pass rush" defense. See what a difference he makes. THAT is the point.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 You still haven't answered the impact of Harrison on Pats 2004 and 2005 pass defenses. It's pretty smart to keep avoiding the question you can't answer. Don't try to shift the focus to only 2005 pass defense or try to compare Bills and Pats defenses. The point is the difference between Pats 2004 and 2005 pass defenses. And the difference is Harrison, not "street FA and 4th stringers". This proves your 'anyboy' theory is totally wrong. 681613[/snapback] *rolls eyes* Since 2005 was THE year they played without Harrison, of COURSE it's the only year they'd be playing with street FAs in the backfield. Therefore it's the only year where comparison is valid. There's no doubt their backfield was better WITH Harrison than without. The point is, even WITH Harrison, their backfield was better than ours due to the fact that they could pressure the passer with four linemen or a combination of some linemen and some linebackers. Once again, I will ask the question that YOU have been managing to dodge. If the Bills lost Clements and McGee, do you think their numbers would even be NEAR what the Pats did having lost almost all their starting secondary? If you say yes, you're delusional.
eball Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 if your point was Harrison made them a better defense, then yeah, rock on. Put Harrison on our "no pass rush" defense. See what a difference he makes. THAT is the point. 681676[/snapback] The Bills' "no pass rush" defense had 5 more sacks than the Pats' "solid D front" defense that performed LAST in the AFC in pass defense. I guarantee Harrison would have made the Bills' (and Pats') defenses better last year. Keep digging, Joe. Why don't you throw out the "but they used nobodies in the secondary and still got to the 2nd round of the playoffs" line again? I'm sure Brady, the offense, and the coaching staff had nothing to do with that, right?
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 Methinks the fact that they played in a division with Bills, Jets & Dolphins was a bigger contributor to their title in '05, than any point you're trying to make in this thread. 681614[/snapback] Surely that didn't hurt. What do you think of this nonsense? Think the Bills could have had 2 4th stringers and a street FA signed halfway through the year starting in the secondary and only given up 20-some odd TDs? I doubt it.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 The Bills' "no pass rush" defense had 5 more sacks than the Pats' "solid D front" defense that performed LAST in the AFC in pass defense. I guarantee Harrison would have made the Bills' (and Pats') defenses better last year. Keep digging, Joe. Why don't you throw out the "but they used nobodies in the secondary and still got to the 2nd round of the playoffs" line again? I'm sure Brady, the offense, and the coaching staff had nothing to do with that, right? 681689[/snapback] And, oh great and powerful Azz, how many of those Buffalo sacks came with only the front four? THAT is the point I'm trying to make. ANY team can record sacks when they bring the house every stinking down. The point I'm trying to make is that the front four was so anemic last season that the coaches HAD to bring LBs and DBs to get a pass rush. That, eball, is what it means to have a "no pass rush" defense. Q: Did you watch the games last year?
Dawgg Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 It's a futile effort arguing on this point. Some fans are built to simply regurgitate whatever the team does and accept it as the best course of action. Emprical evidence shows that teams that draft linemen early and often generally become repeat playoff contenders. And, oh great and powerful Azz, how many of those Buffalo sacks came with only the front four? THAT is the point I'm trying to make. ANY team can record sacks when they bring the house every stinking down. The point I'm trying to make is that the front four was so anemic last season that the coaches HAD to bring LBs and DBs to get a pass rush. That, eball, is what it means to have a "no pass rush" defense. Q: Did you watch the games last year? 681702[/snapback]
eball Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 And, oh great and powerful Azz, how many of those Buffalo sacks came with only the front four?THAT is the point I'm trying to make. ANY team can record sacks when they bring the house every stinking down. The point I'm trying to make is that the front four was so anemic last season that the coaches HAD to bring LBs and DBs to get a pass rush. That, eball, is what it means to have a "no pass rush" defense. Q: Did you watch the games last year? 681702[/snapback] Wrong, Joe. The point you were trying to make, by foolishly referencing the Pats, was that a good/great SS doesn't mean a hill of beans in a defense if you have a "strong D front." The Pats' D sucked last year. 26th in the league. Largely because DESPITE their "strong D front," they couldn't stop anyone with their "nobodies" in the secondary. They made it to the playoffs because they have a 3-time SB winning HC and QB tandem on their side of the field. A year earlier, with a healthy Rodney Harrison and secondary, they dominated on both sides of the ball. You are so ridiculously wrong on this point it's laughable.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 2, 2006 Posted May 2, 2006 Wrong, Joe. The point you were trying to make, by foolishly referencing the Pats, was that a good/great SS doesn't mean a hill of beans in a defense if you have a "strong D front." 681716[/snapback] ' Wrong again, the point I was trying to make is that even IF you have a strong SS, if your Defensive line and backers SUCK your defense will suck on ice. THAT IS THE GODDAMNED POINT. Quit telling me what my point is.
Recommended Posts