Question: if game mattered, would Bills have beaten Denver?

[truth on hold]

I say clearly not for reasons outlined in this thread:

 

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=79742

[The Dean]

I said "No way of knowing" because none of us have any way of knowing...ergo it is the correct answer.

[BADOLBILZ]

I said "No way of knowing" because none of us have any way of knowing...ergo it is the correct answer.

 

"Of course, until the trial is over, none of us can really know if Michael Jackson is innocent or guilty.....but there is one thing we do know......(whispers)he's guillty!"

[Poeticlaw]

I say clearly not for reasons outlined in this thread:

 

http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=79742

 

 

When the game is on the line DJ plays too conservative with is play not to lose philosphy that the teams alwasy ends up losing they had nothing to lose this game so they can play aggressive towards the end.

[eliteqb]

I'm sorry, but Jauron doesn't coach not to lose. He coaches to not lose by a lot....

[DaGimp]

of course Dick has no sack when there is something on the line. they would have lost by 20.

[The Dean]

"Of course, until the trial is over, none of us can really know if Michael Jackson is innocent or guilty.....but there is one thing we do know......(whispers)he's guillty!"

 

 

 

Jackson is clearly guilty of being a freak, but I don't know that he is a child molester.

 

Damn I wish I had the crystal ball that all you Kreskins seem to own.

[truth on hold]

I'm sorry, but Jauron doesn't coach not to lose. He coaches to not lose by a lot....

lol true. but unfortunately in the won-loss column, a loss by a 1 point counts the same as a loss by 30. It's a point not lost on the best coaches like Shanahan, Parcells and Bellicheck, who play to win and don't care if that means exposing themselves to a bigger margin of defeat.

[DazedandConfused]

When the game is on the line DJ plays too conservative with is play not to lose philosphy that the teams alwasy ends up losing they had nothing to lose this game so they can play aggressive towards the end.

Say what?

 

All he had to do with a lead against the Jets was go with the conservative play call and perhaps the Beast who had been great would pull off a great run for a 1st and at worst you burn clock and have Moorman do his job and force Favre to pull off a miracle. I wish he had been more conservative.

 

Last year after beating the tar out of the Boys they drove down into the shadow of their goal posts and if they had done the conservative thing but not make the first down, Lindell puts in the chipshot and the Boys need a super duper miracle to win. Instead he has young Edwards try to force a pass and the Boys pick it off. They still needed and got a duper miracle to win the game with an onside kick recovery but I wish that Jauron had been more conservative in that game.

 

If that is not enough, the Bills start off the Jauron era by getting a lead on the hated Pats and after failing to get a TD, Jauron decides to stick a fork in a far better team and go for the TD on 4th an one. McGahee later admits he did not realize it was 4th down and the Pats respond by taking the ball, going on a long drive an eventually win the game.

 

Season in and season out and in his first year as well these are cases where Jauron zigged when he should have zagged and in each case making the conservative call arguably would have won the game and possibly make for very different seasons in two cases.

[truth on hold]

Say what?

 

All he had to do with a lead against the Jets was go with the conservative play call and perhaps the Beast who had been great would pull off a great run for a 1st and at worst you burn clock and have Moorman do his job and force Favre to pull off a miracle. I wish he had been more conservative.

 

Last year after beating the tar out of the Boys they drove down into the shadow of their goal posts and if they had done the conservative thing but not make the first down, Lindell puts in the chipshot and the Boys need a super duper miracle to win. Instead he has young Edwards try to force a pass and the Boys pick it off. They still needed and got a duper miracle to win the game with an onside kick recovery but I wish that Jauron had been more conservative in that game.

 

If that is not enough, the Bills start off the Jauron era by getting a lead on the hated Pats and after failing to get a TD, Jauron decides to stick a fork in a far better team and go for the TD on 4th an one. McGahee later admits he did not realize it was 4th down and the Pats respond by taking the ball, going on a long drive an eventually win the game.

 

Season in and season out and in his first year as well these are cases where Jauron zigged when he should have zagged and in each case making the conservative call arguably would have won the game and possibly make for very different seasons in two cases.

It's called "Dick-ball" and it's not being too conservative or too aggressive, it's simply being wrong when it matters the most.

[DazedandConfused]

It's called "Dick-ball" and it's not being too conservative or too aggressive, it's simply being wrong when it matters the most.

Agreed. It just strikes me as silly when folks develop some simplistic shorthand summary pf the situation and then conveniently ignore facts that do not fit their theory.

 

If only it were so simple that Jauron needs to be more conservative or more radical. The complex fact is that he simply needs to right more and how he pulls off doing the correct different things at different times is actually the trick that folks need to advocate. Unfortunately an analysis which goes beyond simplicity does not fit into the attention spans needed for a radio show, the few column inches of a newspaper column, or even a look at a website where one sneaks a look while the reader is supposed to be working.