BUFFALOTONE Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 Exactly. IMO, practicing outside all the time offers you opportunities to address all possible game conditions. Changing between outside and inside I can accept as an alternative method, but I honestly think practicing outside covers it all. If you have to practice a particular aspect of the game plan that is not doable given the current weather conditions, then you move inside. If the Bills want to teach the rookies during the OTA's, and think the controlled conditions of the indoor facility works best, fine. I really don't have an issue with that. But at some point in time, they need to be comfortable running the offense in variable conditions. They need to be prepared for whatever comes their way. Always preparing indoors doesn't make the grade, IMO. As I said earlier, tell it to the Steelers, who work outdoors almost all the time. Tell it to the 10th Mountain Division of the Army that trains in bad weather in the mountains of NYS. Do they train indoors because they want "to execute" when they know they might have to execute in inclement weather? NO! That would be stupid. Tim, comparing the Bills, who play many games in bad weather, to the Fins, who may play two, is irresponsible. What do the Packers do? What do the Steelers do? What do the Bears do? Truth is, I don't know. I will be surprised if more than one of them practices inside as a rule. I agree with the majority of what you write here Dean but this is a terible comparison to make. Football and War? Are you serious?
Steely Dan Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 I believe in some outside and some inside practices. However, I believe the chance of injury is greater outside than inside. I also think some practice in the elements is necessary. Getting more practice in the winds of the stadium can only help, IMO. While they aren't likely to be the exact game day conditions it should provide more experience in outdoor stadium play that can be dicey in the Ralph during poor weather. If I were a player preparing to play in 85 degree weather in Miami in December I'd turn the heat up to the 80's in my place to ready my body for the heat, but that's just me.
BUFFALOTONE Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 I believe in some outside and some inside practices. However, I believe the chance of injury is greater outside than inside. I also think some practice in the elements is necessary. Getting more practice in the winds of the stadium can only help, IMO. While they aren't likely to be the exact game day conditions it should provide more experience in outdoor stadium play that can be dicey in the Ralph during poor weather. If I were a player preparing to play in 85 degree weather in Miami in December I'd turn the heat up to the 80's in my place to ready my body for the heat, but that's just me. I agree with this assessment. Thats why he QB goes out there before the game to test the elements.
DieHardBillsFan Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 He sure did look great the first third of last year. This came up at our blog summit at ESPN headquarters, that everybody thought he was a Pro Bowler. AFC South guy Paul Kuharsky was laughing that he thought he was looking at the next Manning or Brady with the Jaguars victory. Then the wheels fell off. I think his confidence was shattered by the game in Miami, where he stretched the ball for a first down like he was trying to break the plane of the end zone. It was a boneheaded play, and Joey Porter merely swiped the ball from him. That was the first of a long string of mental mistakes from a guy who had been pretty sharp up until then. Interceptions, fumbles, sacks because he was indecisive. The offense was tailored for short, quick passes. It'll be interesting to see if a few months away brings his swagger back. And he needs to stay healthy. A decent year in which he missed two or three games makes it very hard to trust him with your franchise moving forward. Great insight! There were a few boneheaded plays that game, which the Bills should have won. I was in Miami that game. Some bad coaching calls too, having Jackson and not Lynch run for 3rd and one and 4th and one missing both including that play you mentioned which should have been a Lynch run as well... If you have a guy that can carry 3 people for a yard why don't we give him the ball more often. There were alot of calls most people on this board were very dissappointed with, and according to your thoughts, calls that just may have cost the season by killing our QB's confidence.
nucci Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 Great insight! There were a few bonheaded plays that game, which the Bills should have won. I was in Miami that game. Some bad coaching calls too, having Jackson and not Lynch run for 3rd and one and 4th and one missing both including that play you mentioned which should have been a Lynch run as well... If you have a guy that can carry 3 people for a yard why don't we give him the ball more often. There were alot of calls most people on this board were very dissappointed with, and according to your thoughts, calls that just may have cost the season by killing our QB's confidence. and we have the same guy calling the plays again this year.
DieHardBillsFan Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 and we have the same guy calling the plays again this year.
The Dean Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 I agree with the majority of what you write here Dean but this is a terible comparison to make. Football and War? Are you serious? I didn't compare football to war, I find that kind of comparison offensive. I compared the preparation of one organization to another.
The Dean Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 Pardon my ignorance Dean, but you write as though Marv practiced outdoors on the most inclement days. Well, wasn't the new facility built around 1995? I am reasonable certain Marv had outdoor practices during the season. BTW, I have no problem with using the indoor facility as an option, if the coach needs the team to work on some elements that can't be practiced outdoors, due to the weather. But the entire argument against letting the weather factor into practice, and the game planned, is flawed from the get-go, IMO. The elements are part of the game, and every team is likely to play in rain, wind and many snow. To ignore them as factors is as silly as ignoring your opponent's strategy and game plan. I mean you don't KNOW what the opponent will do, as NE* has demonstrated to the Bills on several occasion, so why prepare for what might not happen? Silly, no? NFL teams regularly do wet ball drills, to simulate handling the ball in weather and sometimes pump in crowd noise to simulate a particularly loud stadium. They also work on hand signals, to counter the noise in case the players can't hear one another (and/or the coaches). This all relates to being prepared for whatever the team may encounter. Weather is an important part of that preparation, IMO. Of course, if practicing indoors is always the best use of the players and coaches time, why not have training camp inside, in an air conditioned building?
TimGraham Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 Of course, if practicing indoors is always the best use of the players and coaches time, why not have training camp inside, in an air conditioned building? * Because training camp doesn't take place in the winter. And teams do sometimes move inside because of the heat. The Dolphins hold half of their training camp sessions in their bubble. * Because buildings with roofs high enough to allow for full practices cost serious money. When the Bills built their field house, it was the only one in which balls could be freely kicked without obstruction. It might still be the only one, but new ones are built every year, so I'm not sure. St. John Fisher doesn't have an NFL-caliber indoor facility, but the Bills have used the gymnasium when it's raining. * Because indoor practice facilities keep fans (i.e. potential season ticket holders) from watching at training camp. You're reaching farther and farther in a desperate attempt to make your argument. I realize you're heavily invested in making your case, so I'll let it go from here because it's a topic that has dragged an far longer than it deserves to. But, for the record, nobody on this thread ever came close to claiming "indoors is always the best use of the players and coaches time." You're injecting a red herring into the discussion. The whole point of practicing inside isn't because outside is worse or inside is optimal. It's about getting out of the elements when they exist. You clearly think it's more important than some NFL coaches do. You're entitled to that opinion. Let's move on.
Never NEVER Give-up Posted May 22, 2009 Posted May 22, 2009 Oh Tim - one last comment . . . Picture it, the losing coach approaches the podium after the butt-whupping his boy's took and he says . . . . "We practiced outside in the blizzard all week and we were really expecting more snow, but when it warmed up to 40 degrees and sunny (shakes his head), "to a man - we knew we were done". LOL
The Dean Posted May 23, 2009 Posted May 23, 2009 You clearly think it's more important than some NFL coaches do. You're entitled to that opinion. Let's move on. But, perhaps, not others. Let's move on. It's your thread. And I agree.
Buffalo_Stampede Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 Tim, Clark Judge from cbssports, Im sure you know him, says that the Bills offered Pisa Tinoisamoa a contract. Can you confirm this?
DieHardBillsFan Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 Let's move on. Please... I have been hearing alot of chatter about how UFA are passing through the Buffalo Bills without signing because they don't want to be a Bill since they aren't a sexy team or bad climate, but you ask me if that were really the case the Bills wouldn't have gotten TO or Dominic Rhodes. I think the Bills weren't sold on the players that passed through. Players want money and if the Bills want the players they will get them. I think Rhodes is a better sign then Fredd Taylor any day with injury and (age?) in mind. Both are high impact players. I guess going to the Pats is another thing because of the posibility of winning but money talks the most and if the Bills want someone they will get them. IMO Just trying to think of another topic.
PromoTheRobot Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 Please... I have been hearing alot of chatter about how UFA are passing through the Buffalo Bills without signing because they don't want to be a Bill since they aren't a sexy team or bad climate, but you ask me if that were really the case the Bills wouldn't have gotten TO or Dominic Rhodes. I think the Bills weren't sold on the players that passed through. Players want money and if the Bills want the players they will get them. I think Rhodes is a better sign then Fredd Taylor any day with injury and (age?) in mind. Both are high impact players. I guess going to the Pats is another thing because of the posibility of winning but money talks the most and if the Bills want someone they will get them. IMO Just trying to think of another topic. Some players play football. Others worry about making the scene. That said, players talk and Buffalo as a city gets a bad rap. It's true even in the NHL. Craig Rivet, before joining the Sabres, said all he heard was how awful Buffalo was. Now that he lives here he sees the city has plenty to offer. But it's hard when you have a rep. PTR
nucci Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 Some players play football. Others worry about making the scene. That said, players talk and Buffalo as a city gets a bad rap. It's true even in the NHL. Craig Rivet, before joining the Sabres, said all he heard was how awful Buffalo was. Now that he lives here he sees the city has plenty to offer. But it's hard when you have a rep. PTR "When you have a reputation as an early riser, you can sleep until noon". - Ted Marchibroda.
NewHampshireBillsFan Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 I don't think the Bills should practice outside if the conditions make it difficult to run a good practice, like pouring rain or a blizzard. I just want the Bills, specifically Trent Edwards, getting used to throwing in weather they will see almost every week. Its almost always 10+ MPH winds at the Ralph. Just some #'s, Trent Edwards passer rating is 58 in the 1st quarter, 86 in the 2nd, 88 in the 3rd, and 104 in the 4th. No one thinks him adjusting to conditions plays any role in this? I think this is the key point. I think we wonder whether practicing outside would help because this Bills team, uncharacteristically compared to past teams, seems lost in difficult weather, and is not only outplayed by the other team, but the other team seems to know how to handle the weather better in our own stadium! That can't be allowed to go on. I don't think either extreme (all indoors or all outdoors) is probably right, maybe a mixture is needed. Esp. Trent Edwards needs to learn to be a cold weather QB, maybe with some extra outdoor work after an indoor practice. I'll never forget what Joe Ferguson once said. He said he realized that the weather, especially the wind, was going to be a big factor in the Orchard Park stadium, and that he would just have to get good at playing under those conditions. This from a Louisiana boy who played college ball for the Razorbacks. And in spite of the fact that the Bills' results from those years were mixed, I was usually impressed, when sitting in the stadium with how much better Ferguson could throw in very bad conditions compared to the opposing QB, no matter how highly rated the opposing QB was. That didn't always translate into a win but it did maximize our passing game's advantage at least.
Big Turk Posted May 24, 2009 Posted May 24, 2009 Hi Tim, Can the Bills coaches honestly be thinking of starting two rookie guards, one of which didn't play guard in college, a backup free agent center and expect to have any kind of a stability on that O line this season ? Yes, they can...go ask Green Bay how that worked for them a few years ago when they had one of the best rushing attacks in the NFL...and those 2 weren't even considered the best at their prospective positions either...
TimGraham Posted May 25, 2009 Posted May 25, 2009 Please... I have been hearing alot of chatter about how UFA are passing through the Buffalo Bills without signing because they don't want to be a Bill since they aren't a sexy team or bad climate, but you ask me if that were really the case the Bills wouldn't have gotten TO or Dominic Rhodes. I think the Bills weren't sold on the players that passed through. Players want money and if the Bills want the players they will get them. I think Rhodes is a better sign then Fredd Taylor any day with injury and (age?) in mind. Both are high impact players. I guess going to the Pats is another thing because of the posibility of winning but money talks the most and if the Bills want someone they will get them. IMO Just trying to think of another topic. That's not atypical. The thing with the Bills is that on a few of these cases they interviewed the player first. If a player wants to explore his options, he won't be making any commitments whether a contract is offered or not. Don't view it as a snub if Buffalo necessarily.
Recommended Posts