ieatcrayonz Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 There is something being missed in all the analysis of why the Bills lost yesterday. Some are blaming the defense and some JP. Before someone starts in, I don't think you can blame Trent. A lot more than 73.4% of porcelain dolls would have been knocked out by that hit. If you were objective and only looking at the surface, you would have to blame the defense. They NEVER got off the field on 3rd down until the 2nd half and rarely then. But if you did that you'd be failing to understand the strange strategy they employed once Edwards went down. The defense had a great third down rate all year and yesterday they can't even make ONE stop? It may not be obvious, but that was on purpose. The Bills went into "bend but not break" mode to try and shorten the game. By letting the Cards stay on the field, they kept JP off. They would not have done this to Trent. The part that is really the defenses fault is that when they had to stop the score, they could not. You can't give them 100% of the blame for that, because they had put their own backs to the wall on purpose. Most of the fault has to go on JP's shoulders. In summary, I would blame the time of possession stat 100% on JP. I would split the overall blame for the loss 85% JP, 15% defense.
2020 Our Year For Sure Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 I missed the birth of the porcelain dolls thing. Any chance you could go over that again, teacher?
ieatcrayonz Posted October 6, 2008 Author Posted October 6, 2008 I missed the birth of the porcelain dolls thing. Any chance you could go over that again, teacher? Basically, it is that Trent is more fragile than 73.4% of porcelain dolls. I think yesterday's hit would have knocked out 100% of porcelain dolls so I don't think you can pin that on Trent's obvious frailty. The overall point of the post had to do with people knocking the D when they were just implementing a "JP Strategy".
FreakPop Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 There is something being missed in all the analysis of why the Bills lost yesterday. Some are blaming the defense and some JP. Before someone starts in, I don't think you can blame Trent. A lot more than 73.4% of porcelain dolls would have been knocked out by that hit. If you were objective and only looking at the surface, you would have to blame the defense. They NEVER got off the field on 3rd down until the 2nd half and rarely then. But if you did that you'd be failing to understand the strange strategy they employed once Edwards went down. The defense had a great third down rate all year and yesterday they can't even make ONE stop? It may not be obvious, but that was on purpose. The Bills went into "bend but not break" mode to try and shorten the game. By letting the Cards stay on the field, they kept JP off. They would not have done this to Trent. The part that is really the defenses fault is that when they had to stop the score, they could not. You can't give them 100% of the blame for that, because they had put their own backs to the wall on purpose. Most of the fault has to go on JP's shoulders. In summary, I would blame the time of possession stat 100% on JP. I would split the overall blame for the loss 85% JP, 15% defense. Wow dude, your out there!
Beerball Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 There is something being missed in all the analysis of why the Bills lost yesterday. Some are blaming the defense and some JP. Before someone starts in, I don't think you can blame Trent. A lot more than 73.4% of porcelain dolls would have been knocked out by that hit. If you were objective and only looking at the surface, you would have to blame the defense. They NEVER got off the field on 3rd down until the 2nd half and rarely then. But if you did that you'd be failing to understand the strange strategy they employed once Edwards went down. The defense had a great third down rate all year and yesterday they can't even make ONE stop? It may not be obvious, but that was on purpose. The Bills went into "bend but not break" mode to try and shorten the game. By letting the Cards stay on the field, they kept JP off. They would not have done this to Trent. The part that is really the defenses fault is that when they had to stop the score, they could not. You can't give them 100% of the blame for that, because they had put their own backs to the wall on purpose. Most of the fault has to go on JP's shoulders. In summary, I would blame the time of possession stat 100% on JP. I would split the overall blame for the loss 85% JP, 15% defense. Kurt Warner wears gloves indoors and he's a top 10 QB all time.
Boomer860 Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 When a team scores 41 pts on you , you dont have to look far to see the problem. The only problem with Trent is he is not sturdy .Trent is a smart QB with a good arm ,a few more hits like yesterday and it over for him . No defense and bad O line playoff run is over. The same reson Trent was injured is the same reason Lynch cant get in a good run....the Oline. :
DrFishfinder Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 There is something being missed in all the analysis of why the Bills lost yesterday. Some are blaming the defense and some JP. Before someone starts in, I don't think you can blame Trent. A lot more than 73.4% of porcelain dolls would have been knocked out by that hit. If you were objective and only looking at the surface, you would have to blame the defense. They NEVER got off the field on 3rd down until the 2nd half and rarely then. But if you did that you'd be failing to understand the strange strategy they employed once Edwards went down. The defense had a great third down rate all year and yesterday they can't even make ONE stop? It may not be obvious, but that was on purpose. The Bills went into "bend but not break" mode to try and shorten the game. By letting the Cards stay on the field, they kept JP off. They would not have done this to Trent. The part that is really the defenses fault is that when they had to stop the score, they could not. You can't give them 100% of the blame for that, because they had put their own backs to the wall on purpose. Most of the fault has to go on JP's shoulders. In summary, I would blame the time of possession stat 100% on JP. I would split the overall blame for the loss 85% JP, 15% defense. The Bills lost the TOP by nearly 13 minutes. Once Arizona was up by 14 points, Buffalo could no longer afford to play a posession-ball control game. JP has a tendancy to A)Hold onto the ball too long, and B)Look for the deep pass, which plays into his arm strength. Great arm, as in the Evans bomb, but after a 14 point deficit, the Bills had to put points on the board in a hurry, especially the way Warner was marching the Cards downfield. JP's strength isn't a ball control offense, it's quick strike, deep. Arizona's defense took that away and their offense just outplayed the Bills' defense and Fewell.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 There is something being missed in all the analysis of why the Bills lost yesterday. Some are blaming the defense and some JP. Before someone starts in, I don't think you can blame Trent. A lot more than 73.4% of porcelain dolls would have been knocked out by that hit. If you were objective and only looking at the surface, you would have to blame the defense. They NEVER got off the field on 3rd down until the 2nd half and rarely then. But if you did that you'd be failing to understand the strange strategy they employed once Edwards went down. The defense had a great third down rate all year and yesterday they can't even make ONE stop? It may not be obvious, but that was on purpose. The Bills went into "bend but not break" mode to try and shorten the game. By letting the Cards stay on the field, they kept JP off. They would not have done this to Trent. The part that is really the defenses fault is that when they had to stop the score, they could not. You can't give them 100% of the blame for that, because they had put their own backs to the wall on purpose. Most of the fault has to go on JP's shoulders. In summary, I would blame the time of possession stat 100% on JP. I would split the overall blame for the loss 85% JP, 15% defense. Ok wait, are you being sarcastic, or are you actually suggesting the Bills purposely allowed the Cardinals to drive down field all day? That makes literally zero sense and if you're being serious (which i sort of doubt) then you are an idiot.
ieatcrayonz Posted October 6, 2008 Author Posted October 6, 2008 The Bills lost the TOP by nearly 13 minutes. Once Arizona was up by 14 points, Buffalo could no longer afford to play a posession-ball control game. JP has a tendancy to A)Hold onto the ball too long, and B)Look for the deep pass, which plays into his arm strength. Great arm, as in the Evans bomb, but after a 14 point deficit, the Bills had to put points on the board in a hurry, especially the way Warner was marching the Cards downfield. JP's strength isn't a ball control offense, it's quick strike, deep. Arizona's defense took that away and their offense just outplayed the Bills' defense and Fewell. Maybe I didn't explain it right. I think the Bills D stayed on the field for long stretches on purpose. They wanted to shorten the game by giving each team fewer possessions. With Trent in, they would not have done this. They just didn't want JP to have to handle the O. It would have been a brilliant strategy if they could have stopped the scoring.
ieatcrayonz Posted October 6, 2008 Author Posted October 6, 2008 Ok wait, are you being sarcastic, or are you actually suggesting the Bills purposely allowed the Cardinals to drive down field all day? That makes literally zero sense and if you're being serious (which i sort of doubt) then you are an idiot. Think about it. The Bills were trying to take time off the clock by sustaining drives like they do every week. Only this week they had to do it with defense. It's risky but it was worth the risk. If they stopped the Cards in the red zone they would have won the game.
DrFishfinder Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 Maybe I didn't explain it right. I think the Bills D stayed on the field for long stretches on purpose. They wanted to shorten the game by giving each team fewer possessions. With Trent in, they would not have done this. They just didn't want JP to have to handle the O. It would have been a brilliant strategy if they could have stopped the scoring. With all due respect, I don't think that was the case at all. I don't think that any DC in his right mind, would want his defense to stay on the field for long periods of time. Especially away from home, with a backup QB and having to come from behind to win.
edwardslynchevans Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 The defense had a great third down rate all year and yesterday they can't even make ONE stop? It may not be obvious, but that was on purpose. The Bills went into "bend but not break" mode to try and shorten the game. By letting the Cards stay on the field, they kept JP off. They would not have done this to Trent. The part that is really the defenses fault is that when they had to stop the score, they could not. You can't give them 100% of the blame for that, because they had put their own backs to the wall on purpose. Most of the fault has to go on JP's shoulders. In summary, I would blame the time of possession stat 100% on JP. I would split the overall blame for the loss 85% JP, 15% defense. That's the stupidest analysis I've ever heard. So because their starting QB gets injured, they'll just allow the other team to convert first downs?
Chilly Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 That's the stupidest analysis I've ever heard. So because their starting QB gets injured, they'll just allow the other team to convert first downs? This coming from the guy calling Perry Fewell mentally retarded.
edwardslynchevans Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 This coming from the guy calling Perry Fewell mentally retarded. If you actually read my post in that thread, I explain why. So you're agreeing with this guy? Starting QB gets injured, Dick Jauron and the crew say to themselves "ah sh-- better allow Kurt Warner to pick us apart all day cause this J.P. dude sucks."
ieatcrayonz Posted October 6, 2008 Author Posted October 6, 2008 That's the stupidest analysis I've ever heard. So because their starting QB gets injured, they'll just allow the other team to convert first downs? Exactly. That kills clock. Don't get me wrong. I don't think they let them get the TDs on purpose.
edwardslynchevans Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 Exactly. That kills clock. Don't get me wrong. I don't think they let them get the TDs on purpose. You don't go into bend but don't break mode over who's QB. This defense all year has been a lot more aggressive and it has what made them successful. I think the book was already out on Warner in the previous game against the Jets. Blitz him like crazy and he'll make turnovers. The Bills thought differently and judging by what they were running on defense thought Kurt Warner was just going to gun it down the field the whole day. If anything, having J.P. in the game put more emphasis on the defense and special teams winning the game for them.
Chilly Posted October 6, 2008 Posted October 6, 2008 If you actually read my post in that thread, I explain why. So you're agreeing with this guy? Starting QB gets injured, Dick Jauron and the crew say to themselves "ah sh-- better allow Kurt Warner to pick us apart all day cause this J.P. dude sucks." Brilliant.
ieatcrayonz Posted October 6, 2008 Author Posted October 6, 2008 You don't go into bend but don't break mode over who's QB. This defense all year has been a lot more aggressive and it has what made them successful. I think the book was already out on Warner in the previous game against the Jets. Blitz him like crazy and he'll make turnovers. The Bills thought differently and judging by what they were running on defense thought Kurt Warner was just going to gun it down the field the whole day. If anything, having J.P. in the game put more emphasis on the defense and special teams winning the game for them. They needed to shorten the game. You do that by killing clock. You can't kill the clock when you are getting turnovers because that gives the ball to JP. He can't sustain drives. As I said, it was a risky manuver. It didn't pay off. That is the nature of risk.
Recommended Posts