AnthonyF Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 Week 1 Palmer 19 120 yds win 23-10 Rushing 108 Week 2 Vick 19 90 yds win 14-3 Rushing 306 Losman 18 82 yds win 16-6 Rushing 105 Week 3 None Week 4 None Week 5 Alex Smith 19 165yds Win 34-20 Rushing 165 Week 6 Rothlisberger 19 235 yds Win 45-7 Rushing 224 Week 7 None Week 8 V. Young 15 87 yds Win 28-22 Rushing 111 Walter 14 51 yds Win 20-13 Rushing 40 Week 9 Losman 15 102 yds Win 24-10 Rushing 120 Huard 15 142 yds Win 31-17 Rushing 180 Week 10 Losman 13 83 yds Lose 17-16 Rushing 111 There you have it 10 weeks only 10 times less then 20 passes and Losman is 3 of those and the only loss. All others were easy wins in every case, where the team led by at least a TD throuout the game except for the GB-Buf game.... And our Rushing yards those games were also less then each teams except for 1 case. Thus we must be really pathetic or working on our 1920 game plan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zow2 Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 I think it's clear,,,,if you can run the ball with even modest success you can burn clock, limit possessions for your opponent and stay away from costly INT's and sacks. You can almost always stay in a game if you have zero turnovers and good possession time. Unfortunately Buffalo's defense isn't good enough to win consistently like that. I think it's a great plan for certain games like last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 It's a winning strategy while you have the luxury of a lead. We were running most of the day while we were either slightly down or slightly ahead against one of the highest-octane offenses in the league. In the end, it was an interesting strategy that almost worked... sort of. But you just know even if we'd scored a TD in place of Lindell's miss, Manning et al. would have smoked us right back. They were getting plays 13 yards a clip, no matter if they ran, passed or lit their farts on fire. They can move the ball like that; it's a consistent offense --- everything that we are not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 18, 2006 Author Share Posted November 18, 2006 It's a winning strategy while you have the luxury of a lead. We were running most of the day while we were either slightly down or slightly ahead against one of the highest-octane offenses in the league. In the end, it was an interesting strategy that almost worked... sort of. But you just know even if we'd scored a TD in place of Lindell's miss, Manning et al. would have smoked us right back. They were getting plays 13 yards a clip, no matter if they ran, passed or lit their farts on fire. They can move the ball like that; it's a consistent offense --- everything that we are not. 840433[/snapback] The only time we did throw was the opening drive converting 3 of 3 third downs. We were never up the rest of the game.... You guys are so dense.... The only game I can agree with was the Miami game, where we were up the entire game. We are the only team that lost throwing under 20 times and we were tied midway through the 4th quarter vs. GB.... Something is wrong here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Brady Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 If they execute these game plans right we will be 4-1 since the bye week heading into the jets game. Like it or not this is the only chance they have with the limited talent on offense...Thats right you heard it here first they will beat jacksonville and San Diegeo at home in the cold! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I 90 Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 Thus we must be really pathetic or working on our 1920 game plan. 840413[/snapback] If you choose to believe that this team is far from pathetic (as I do) then the ineptness is by design. The staff is imposing its will on its OWN team in the hopes that the team will at some point begin to impose its will on the rest of the league. Employing a power running attack with this collection of talent and turning Losman into the second coming of Joe Ferguson (instead of Jim Kelly) is a work of visionary genius. Or not. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 It's nice to see the young man's leading the league in something besides sacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibs Posted November 18, 2006 Share Posted November 18, 2006 The only time we did throw was the opening drive converting 3 of 3 third downs. We were never up the rest of the game.... You guys are so dense.... The only game I can agree with was the Miami game, where we were up the entire game. We are the only team that lost throwing under 20 times and we were tied midway through the 4th quarter vs. GB.... Something is wrong here. 840491[/snapback] I'm not disagreeing with your point, just your usage of the Colts game(as the only loss) to help prove your point. The Colts are undefeated & clearly the gameplan employed was a great strategy against them. We kept the game close all the way through & had a chance near the end to win....sort of. Aside from that, what makes you think the lack of passing is a direct result of Losman & not a direct result of the OL & passing game in general? IMO we'll have a better indication very soon about how much is JPs fault & how much is the OL.....if JP can scramble out of trouble....avoid a sack or two....& complete a few more passes(making his % even higher)....our culprit will be clear. If not......well, you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 18, 2006 Author Share Posted November 18, 2006 I'm not disagreeing with your point, just your usage of the Colts game(as the only loss) to help prove your point. The Colts are undefeated & clearly the gameplan employed was a great strategy against them. We kept the game close all the way through & had a chance near the end to win....sort of. Aside from that, what makes you think the lack of passing is a direct result of Losman & not a direct result of the OL & passing game in general? IMO we'll have a better indication very soon about how much is JPs fault & how much is the OL.....if JP can scramble out of trouble....avoid a sack or two....& complete a few more passes(making his % even higher)....our culprit will be clear. If not......well, you know. 840575[/snapback] That's my point... Let's see what/who the culprit is.... Let's make informed decisions... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted November 19, 2006 Share Posted November 19, 2006 I've noticed that the team whose quarterback takes a one-yard loss on three consecutive plays to end each half usually wins the game. Is this a good strategy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnthonyF Posted November 19, 2006 Author Share Posted November 19, 2006 I've noticed that the team whose quarterback takes a one-yard loss on three consecutive plays to end each half usually wins the game. Is this a good strategy? 841146[/snapback] Thank you for showing your stupidity. Amzing how little debate there usually is, just non-sensical silly retorts... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts