Fingon Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Which is 23rd best in the NFL, less than a FG ahead of Seattle and Kansas City. Still 5 more points a game than the previous year.
Hanoverbills Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Buster is right, and our players know it. We were demoralized by our inept coaching and Losman last year. They clearly gave up during the last half of the season. So Losmans two starts last year demoralized our last half of the season. How many games did Edwards start the second half of the year?
Hanoverbills Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Still 5 more points a game than the previous year. Each year in the last three years , we score more points than the year before . But if you look at the win and lost records of teams we played againts, we should've score more points each year 2006 -wins 147 and 109 lost 2007 -wins 132 and 124 lost 2008 -wins 116 and 140 lost , as you look every year we had a easier schedules . We should score more points than the year before. Yet even with a easier schedule each year, we couldn't get over the 7 win total for the last three years.
VOR Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Lets see, a third string running back, a third tier FA, three rookies and the biggest jerk in football. Brilliant I tell you, brilliant! Come back when you have a firmer grasp on reality, Mick.
spartacus Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 I think the one main reason for our decline last year after game six was Trent Edwards and other QB play. It was the worst I've ever seen. Maybe O.C. had something to do with it, but Trent looked terrified out there, and absolutely unwilling to throw the ball. Deer in the headlights. No other team could've won with that kind of QB play. Let's hope it doesn't happen again, or, it if does, they see the signs quick and substitute. Both JP and Trent both played horrible last year after 3 years in the DICK system. it is no coincidence that Dick has never had good QB play. He employs very weak OCs and then demands that they run ultra-conservative systems which are designed to keep the game close minimizing turnovers - there is a directive to not take chances like not throwing the ball to the endzone which would risk the sure fire FG chance you already have. This team will never be fun to watch or be very successful while Dick is the coach.
BillsfaninFl Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Like the loss to the 49ers last year, the only teams the Bills beat were LOSERS,besides Chargers and Broncos. Buffalo's offense was so easy to figure out, double cover Lee Evans and put 8 in the box to stop Lynch and Jackson and its a win. The Bills didn't win those seven game with spectacular play calling, Trent Edwards pulled out losses with really great comebacks on the Rams,Raiders and Jags and he outplayed Phillip Rivers and Jay Cutler to beat the Broncos and the Chargers. Not to mention that Lynch and Jackson were usually met at the line and managed to gain yards carrying defenders along the way. The coaching staff choked hard last season, 5-1 and then went 2-8 and were completly SWEPT in the division... amen
BillsfaninFl Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Both JP and Trent both played horrible last year after 3 years in the DICK system. it is no coincidence that Dick has never had good QB play. He employs very weak OCs and then demands that they run ultra-conservative systems which are designed to keep the game close minimizing turnovers - there is a directive to not take chances like not throwing the ball to the endzone which would risk the sure fire FG chance you already have. This team will never be fun to watch or be very successful while Dick is the coach. Good points all. If you are a head coach who is not a good tactition, then you play not to lose. If you win enough games (even in losing seasons), you can be a head coach for a few more years. Of course, there are always cheap S.O.B.s that will hire poor coaches to "administer" the team for a while. Hmmm... that sounds familiar.
BillsVet Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Each year in the last three years , we score more points than the year before . But if you look at the win and lost records of teams we played againts, we should've score more points each year2006 -wins 147 and 109 lost 2007 -wins 132 and 124 lost 2008 -wins 116 and 140 lost , as you look every year we had a easier schedules . We should score more points than the year before. Yet even with a easier schedule each year, we couldn't get over the 7 win total for the last three years. Absolutely. The schedule was easier, yet the offensive results even with a new OC in 08 weren't much better. I'd further note that teams like Miami, Baltimore, and Atlanta had few offensive weapons. The latter two teams featured rookies QB's, who didn't have multiple targets either. Yet each of those teams had an offensive identity which they didn't depart from: efficient passing combined with strong running games. All three of those teams made the playoffs and protected their QB's. They also remained true to their identity. The common denominator among playoff teams is solid coaching. Bad and mediocre teams more often than not have bad to mediocre coaching. We can argue about QB play all day, but when I see rookie HC's like Mike Smith and John Harbaugh get to the post-season with rookies, it tells me DJ is simply inept. Nice research here.
spartacus Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Absolutely. The schedule was easier, yet the offensive results even with a new OC in 08 weren't much better. I'd further note that teams like Miami, Baltimore, and Atlanta had few offensive weapons. The latter two teams featured rookies QB's, who didn't have multiple targets either. Yet each of those teams had an offensive identity which they didn't depart from: efficient passing combined with strong running games. All three of those teams made the playoffs and protected their QB's. They also remained true to their identity. The common denominator among playoff teams is solid coaching. Bad and mediocre teams more often than not have bad to mediocre coaching. We can argue about QB play all day, but when I see rookie HC's like Mike Smith and John Harbaugh get to the post-season with rookies, it tells me DJ is simply inept. Nice research here. you are not quite accurate when it comes to Dick. he has a mantra which he has imparted to his team which is reflected in their performance on both sides of the ball He preaches and teaches that - "It's hard to win in the NFL" and it shows in how his team plays against the better teams
DrFishfinder Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Who needs improvement when you can have continuity? How true, oh pouched one. SQ
DrFishfinder Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 The common denominator among playoff teams is solid coaching. Bad and mediocre teams more often than not have bad to mediocre coaching. We can argue about QB play all day, but when I see rookie HC's like Mike Smith and John Harbaugh get to the post-season with rookies, it tells me DJ is simply inept. 7 out of 8 losing seasons, a combined record of 7-9 in Chicago and the exact same record in Buffalo = the last word in your post.
C.Biscuit97 Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Absolutely. The schedule was easier, yet the offensive results even with a new OC in 08 weren't much better. I'd further note that teams like Miami, Baltimore, and Atlanta had few offensive weapons. The latter two teams featured rookies QB's, who didn't have multiple targets either. Yet each of those teams had an offensive identity which they didn't depart from: efficient passing combined with strong running games. All three of those teams made the playoffs and protected their QB's. They also remained true to their identity. The common denominator among playoff teams is solid coaching. Bad and mediocre teams more often than not have bad to mediocre coaching. We can argue about QB play all day, but when I see rookie HC's like Mike Smith and John Harbaugh get to the post-season with rookies, it tells me DJ is simply inept. Nice research here. In games Edwards started, the Bills averaged 23.8 points. That would put them ahead of the Fins, and less than a half a point behind the Falcons & Ravens. As for your point about the offensive talent on those teams, it is flat out wrong. The Falcons had a top 5 pick at QB, 2 1st round receviers, & the NFL rushing champ. Yeah, you're right. What an untalented nucleus. The Ravens have a 1st round QB, a former 1st round RB, a 2nd round rb, a 1st round receiver, and a first round TE. The Fins probably have the worst offensive talent, but we scored more points than them in Edwards' games. Still, they had a former 1st round QB, 2 1st round rbs, and a very high 1st round receiver. The Bills have a 3rd QB, a 1st round rb, an UDFA rb, a 1st round receiver, a 4th and 7th round TE, and 3 2nd round receivers. They are not as talented as those teams, yet put up similar point production. But the Bills and Jauron suck.
Mickey Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Come back when you have a firmer grasp on reality, Mick. Oh goody, a personal attack rather than a discussion of the facts. You are the one in lollipop land, Suzie. Perhaps you could point out what part of that brief post was not accurate? You know, since I don't have a grip on reality and all, I am sure you can stop drooling long enough to show how wildly inaccurate my assertions were. Three rookies: Levitre, Nelson and Wood Third string running back: Lynch = 1st string, Freddie = 2nd string which would make Rhodes what? Oh yeah, third string. The depth chart at the team website confirms Rhodes as the third string RB. Third tier FA: Hangartner. Never was a full time starter in 4 years with the Panthers. Biggest jerk in football. Really, apart from Bellicheat, who comes close to TO? To top it off, we divested ourselves of the only pro bowler on offense, have a guard playing tackle and a career right tackle playing on the left. I don't see these as cunningly brilliant personnel moves that will instantly address our offensive woes, far from it. Long term, it may pay off but this is, outside of a lot of luck, a rebuilding year.
LGB Posted May 31, 2009 Author Posted May 31, 2009 Who needs improvement when you can have continuity? Assuming the goal at OBD is to reach the playoffs and presumably a chance at a Championship, at the end of the day, the question that must be answered is: "Do you have enough of a talented and well coached team to beat New England or any of the other AFC East teams?"...Because the path through the AFC East must be won - if the playoffs are honestly the goal. So just how well did the Bills do against their AFC East foes last year? 0-6 in 2008! Yep, that’s right…no wins in the AFC East. If the real goal is to slop around through the motions and maintain enough fan interest to make a profit, that goal has been achieved a long time ago. Could it be that fans are either satisfied with mediocrity or just continue to buy into the annual OBD marketing plan, as evidenced by continuing to sell-out the stadium? Whatever the case, why not hold OBD accountable to a higher standard? We, the ticket holders are the people paying for performance and have proven our high standard of commitment year after year. But no better than 25th on offense for six years running seems to mean that OBD is not upholding their part of the deal and is it too much to think that the long-suffering season ticket holders and paying fans might demand better?
BillsVet Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 In games Edwards started, the Bills averaged 23.8 points. That would put them ahead of the Fins, and less than a half a point behind the Falcons & Ravens. As for your point about the offensive talent on those teams, it is flat out wrong. The Falcons had a top 5 pick at QB, 2 1st round receviers, & the NFL rushing champ. Yeah, you're right. What an untalented nucleus. The Ravens have a 1st round QB, a former 1st round RB, a 2nd round rb, a 1st round receiver, and a first round TE. The Fins probably have the worst offensive talent, but we scored more points than them in Edwards' games. Still, they had a former 1st round QB, 2 1st round rbs, and a very high 1st round receiver. The Bills have a 3rd QB, a 1st round rb, an UDFA rb, a 1st round receiver, a 4th and 7th round TE, and 3 2nd round receivers. They are not as talented as those teams, yet put up similar point production. But the Bills and Jauron suck. Yes, DJ sucks. Winning 43% of your 130 games in the NFL constitutes sucking. And when NFL teams are looking for a low cost option at HC (where people like Tony Sparano receive 3M contracts) DJ is attractive. There is absolutely no reason why he should still be leading a franchise's players onto a field. When you coach for two seasons and have high expectations in the third, yet bumble your way to 2-8 in the final 10 against one of the league's easiest schedule, there is no reason to retain the guy. But yeah, it's all QB play all the time. DJ flat out stinks. For the record, prior to last season, few first round rookie QB's had ever been as far as Flacco and Ryan. Simply being a first round pick does not equate to being an offensive weapon. Roddy White is on par with Lee Evans, but Michael Jenkins isn't outstanding by any means. I'd also say that Michael Turner and Marshawn Lynch are not far apart talent wise either. What I would like to know is how rookie HC's can coach rookie QB's with guys like Mike Mularkey and Cam Cameron at OC and get into the playoffs. Yet DJ, with a second year QB and a guy with 10+ years as a NFL coach and nearly the same time as a NFL QB can't do better. Please explain that to me, because I'd love to know. QB play was an issue at times last year. I'd venture to say that coaching has been a problem for much longer. And for the record, scoring more points than the Fins is not grounds for success. Miami beat those same Bills twice, with a rookie HC, weak armed QB, rookie HC, and Dan Henning calling the plays with no decent receiving options, a rookie LT, and little at TE. Do you work for the Bills, or have some vested interest in their continued mediocrity?
VOR Posted May 31, 2009 Posted May 31, 2009 Oh goody, a personal attack rather than a discussion of the facts. You are the one in lollipop land, Suzie. Perhaps you could point out what part of that brief post was not accurate? You know, since I don't have a grip on reality and all, I am sure you can stop drooling long enough to show how wildly inaccurate my assertions were. Three rookies: Levitre, Nelson and Wood Third string running back: Lynch = 1st string, Freddie = 2nd string which would make Rhodes what? Oh yeah, third string. The depth chart at the team website confirms Rhodes as the third string RB. Third tier FA: Hangartner. Never was a full time starter in 4 years with the Panthers. Biggest jerk in football. Really, apart from Bellicheat, whoa comes close to TO? To top it off, we divested ourselves of the only pro bowler on offense, have a guard playing tackle and a career right tackle playing on the left. I don't see these as cunningly brilliant personnel moves that will instantly address our offensive woes, far from it. Long term, it may pay off but this is, outside of a lot of luck, a rebuilding year. The rookies were considered among the best at their positions. If they were late round picks and/or players who were considered longshots, I would agree with you and say that the Bills did little to improve themselves. Rhodes has been a starter in the past, on a SB-winning team no less, and was #2 with the Colts last year and outperformed their starter. He will start the season #2 for the Bills and if either Lynch or Jackson get hurt, will be the #2 guy. Beyond that, the Bills can utilize his pass-catching and short-yardage skills. Hangartner was a de facto starter for the Panthers. Whether they chose to make him a permanent starter is immaterial. And this is the same team that dumped center Justin Hartwig, who only went on to anchor the SB-winning Steelers' O-line, while the guy they had starting over Hangartner continued to miss starts due to injury, and during which games there was no dropoff in O-line play when Hangartner was in there. Who the F cares if TO is a jerk? If that's the best you can come up with, while ignoring the huge boost he'll give to the offense by his presence, there's really not much more to say. Finally, regarding the O-line, it's early still. Worst-case scenario is they keep the right side the same as it was last year, start one of the rookies at LG, and have Bell or Chambers starting at LT. None of the LT's can do worse than the "Pro Bowler" who performed poorly last year.
billsfan_34 Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 I know going 7-9 is frustrating but we did not suck out loud. The Lions suck out loud. The Raiders suck out loud. We suck just enough. PTR If youare 0-16 or 7-9 whats the real difference? Nothing! Both teams weren't in the post season.
spartacus Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 . None of the LT's can do worse than the "Pro Bowler" who performed poorly last year. Bills fans tout themselves as being the most knowledgeable in the NFL, but this comment echoed by many on this board is downright embarrassing.
thewildrabbit Posted June 1, 2009 Posted June 1, 2009 Not for nothing but when you make as many dramatic changes to the offensive line as the Bills did this past off season you have to consider the team is rebuilding mode....AGAIN. For those of you who think you can insert 2 rookies as guards and a back up free agent at center and have brilliant play are delusional! In order to run past the line of scrimmage there needs to be an opening...In order to get the ball down field the QB needs time to throw it... I can see it now, once the season starts everyone will complain about Edwards not hitting his receivers and Lynch and Jackson not gaining yards because its lack of Talent. It is lack of talent alright, only it is lacking where is has been since the days of C Kent Hull, G Jim Richter, LT Will Wolford, RT house Ballard, G Glenn Parker and TE Keith Mckeller. Until the Bills build a dominate offensive line they will continue to be reside in the land of mediocrity. I do give the Bills some credit for trying the last few years. They hired one of the best line coaches and tried to bring in top free agent linemen and just couldn't get it to work. When the Bills drafted outland trophy winner Jim Richter 1st round #16 in 1980 he sat on the bench for a few years learning his craft while playing special teams and being a back up. Chuck Knox was smart enough not to start rookie linemen, Richter played 14 seasons for the Bills and started in all 4 SB's. The Point is, rarely do O linemen come right out of college and become dominant their first year playing, especially when one of them is slotted to start in a position he didn't even play in college.
Recommended Posts