berndogg Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 No need to close the thread because the original post was not very well presented or thought out (more reverses as a mainstay of the offense? overuse of reverses is one of the reasons the current offense needs to be retooled). Some of us see the advent of TO as a good excuse for us to make the offense more potent and since the stats (Bills ranking well in the lower third of the league consistently in many offensive categories whether under Fairchild or Schoenert) indicate a retooling is essential any excuse will do. The Bills problems are not simply poor schemes (as I said given a far more productive #2 WR even the current schemes we use should work better) but the specific ways the Bills choose to run routes does not seem to get them the separation that one would expect given the blazing speed of players like Evans and Parrish or to produce more from RBs as receivers when the RBs are more productive receivers elsewhere (Lynch in college and even Willis was a more productive pass catcher in Balt than he was here). If the coming of TO gets the Bills to run more slant plays, make more use of pics (I'd rather we get s few more penalties in exchange for a few more touchdowns, and more uses of crossing patterns, this would be a good thing. The primary fallacy of the initial post is that it seems to maintain that because we do not want to force the youngsters to learn something new, we should keep right on doing something that has not been effective in producing receptions, yardage, or TDs. I think you raise a good point in that the question is: Don't you want the O to change? I think most Bills fans do and if TO is the excuse for doing this then so be it. The original post was poking fun at people who seem to be nit picking to find a problem with this very low risk, high potential reward signing. I think that it's quite obvious that this signing gives us an array of offensive options that we didn't previously have and I'm excited about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 I really am shocked at the amount of serious responses here, extremely disappointing. I'm not saying the original post was THAT funny, but I thought it was something to build on, I guess not, admins please close this thread. Don't be so hard on Sage, he's Ivy league you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLynchTrain Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 The original post was poking fun at people who seem to be nit picking to find a problem with this very low risk, high potential reward signing. I think that it's quite obvious that this signing gives us an array of offensive options that we didn't previously have and I'm excited about it. hey i was in hoboken visiting some friends last weekend for the St Patty Day parade....pretty good town, too bad i don't remember much. I heard they have a pretty good Bills backer bar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
berndogg Posted March 10, 2009 Author Share Posted March 10, 2009 hey i was in hoboken visiting some friends last weekend for the St Patty Day parade....pretty good town, too bad i don't remember much. I heard they have a pretty good Bills backer bar? Yea, its called the shannon, its a pretty good spot, when we were 5-1 there were a ton of bills fans there, when we were 7-8 not so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DazedandConfused Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 The original post was poking fun at people who seem to be nit picking to find a problem with this very low risk, high potential reward signing. I think that it's quite obvious that this signing gives us an array of offensive options that we didn't previously have and I'm excited about it. There are such a significant number of stupid posts on TSW that often sarcasm is lost on us simpletons. if you are going to be sarcastic you have to raise your hand and wave it or risk being taken seriously on TSW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 There are such a significant number of stupid posts on TSW that often sarcasm is lost on us simpletons. if you are going to be sarcastic you have to raise your hand and wave it or risk being taken seriously on TSW. i have to agree, i didn't quite get the sarcasm. But now that i know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts