seq004 Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I looked at it again and it was a bad read by Edwards no doubt, but Reed's not even looking at the ball or Edwards and then on the next series Edwards throws to Reed to the sidelines and Reed just stops and it's almost picked again. I thought these two had good chemistry in the past so I don't know what the the problem is.
Maddog69 Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I looked at it again and it was a bad read by Edwards no doubt, but Reed's not even looking at the ball or Edwards and then on the next series Edwards throws to Reed to the sidelines and Reed just stops and it's almost picked again. I thought these two had good chemistry in the past so I don't know what the the problem is. The problem is that Edwards is not a good QB.
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I looked at it again and it was a bad read by Edwards no doubt, but Reed's not even looking at the ball or Edwards and then on the next series Edwards throws to Reed to the sidelines and Reed just stops and it's almost picked again. I thought these two had good chemistry in the past so I don't know what the the problem is. TE blew it on the pick to Reed; it wasn't even an accurate throw to Reed, notwithstanding the fact that Reed wasn't looking for the ball. On the few passes to the sideline, including the one to Reed, again it looked like TE just misfired. Guys looked open; but the ball was nowhere near the receivers, probably because TE was playing scared and trying not to throw a pick.
Huuuge Bills Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I looked at it again and it was a bad read by Edwards no doubt, but Reed's not even looking at the ball or Edwards and then on the next series Edwards throws to Reed to the sidelines and Reed just stops and it's almost picked again. I thought these two had good chemistry in the past so I don't know what the the problem is. Reed stopped running his route because there was a LB in front of him, a sane QB wouldn't have thrown the ball in his direction. After he stopped his route, Reed looked up-field to try to get open. But Trent had already thrown the ball. That throw was 100% on Edwards.
Kelly the Dog Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 Reed stopped running his route because there was a LB in front of him, a sane QB wouldn't have thrown the ball in his direction. After he stopped his route, Reed looked up-field to try to get open. But Trent had already thrown the ball. That throw was 100% on Edwards. At first it looked like Edwards was staring down Reed the entire time but it wasnt the case. On the backside replay it's crystal clear that Edwards was staring down a different receiver, which turned out to be Parrish. He wasn't looking at Reed at all until the very last second when he threw the ball. It was just a terrible decision and throw as Reed was barely looking himself. But Edwards wasnt staring Reed down, it was Parrish, who wasnt open, then Trent turned toward Reed and immediately threw. It's also a very good example of how watching TV and the quarterback can be extremely deceiving. Without that camera angle directly behind Edwards, I would have sworn that he stared down Reed the entire time. But he didnt at all.
marauderswr80 Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 Personally, I feel sick by the way the O has played thus far......but one bomb to Owens could raise Trents confidence in a hurry, but then again the big ugly guys up front have to block.
Frez Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 Personally, I feel sick by the way the O has played thus far......but one bomb to Owens could raise Trents confidence in a hurry, but then again the big ugly guys up front have to block. I don't think we have any BIG UGLY guys up front. That is the problem to me!
Sisyphean Bills Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 Well, we are told that there are no communication issues in the new no-huddle.
ans4e64 Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I think Reed is not paying attention because he sees the man, and sometimes two men, are right on him, and probably thinks no QB in the world would still throw it to him.
Red Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I disagree on the O-Line. Wood looks awesome, and Butler is a welcome addition to the scrubs they had before- as is Hangartner. No, the problem is the lack of downfield throws which is either Edwards lack of confidence, Schonert being a wimp w/his play-calling, or both. I don't know if Lee Evans even caught a pass this offseason. Does he still play w/the Bills? Owens certainly will be welcome, but it would really suck if Trent is relying solely on Owens for receiving help (from outside, first glances, it would appear so) as Owens does have a tendency of missing some games w/injuries. As I posted elsewhere, if this is what we get this season, then Jauron, GUY, and Modrak must go. Brandon should be moved out of GM duties, and a real GM/ Coach should be brought in. Shanahan, Holmgren, and Cowher are the only names worth considering.
ofiba Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 If Edwards threw the ball to Rhodes on that play, it's a 20 yard gain at least. Watch the opposite endzone replay. Rhodes is coming across the middle breaking wide open as soon as Edwards is throwing the ball. In fact, I think later in the game they call the same play and actually throw it to Rhodes for a big gain. The coaching staff must have seen that on the INT play.
JoeF Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I can't argue the fact that the first O has looked horrible. More horrible than ever.. But I will throw out a few things... - We have played a set of three of the toughest defenses in the league -- in the Titans, Bears and Steelers..all experienced in their scheme..all with playmakers. The Packers are switching schemes but have one of the godfather's of the 3-4 as the D coordinator. - For most of the preseason we have been missing what Dickie and Turk said we needed and what we actually acquired -- another key weapon. TO will bring additional focus on the edge of the field and out of the middle. One less player is in the middle on every down and every defender in the middle has a little bit more ground to cover. That could make a huge difference. - The first O has played what is akin to about a full game in the four preseason games. I have seen a lot of middle runs, no crossing routes/picks, very few screens or draws. All things a team does to cover a bad offensive line. We have been more plain vanilla than a world full of Dick Jauron clones would be. We are always throwing deep in practice according to the video highlights -- why aren't we doing this in games. I just have this gnawing feeling in my gut that noone can be this bad.....if we are -- I think all of us should follow SDS to the bookie and bet that under 7...cause if we are truly this bad -- I would bet the under on 4 wins. This team just has too much talent for that...I swear....
PDaDdy Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 Personally, I feel sick by the way the O has played thus far......but one bomb to Owens could raise Trents confidence in a hurry, but then again the big ugly guys up front have to block. It's been a while since I have seen one but I seem to recall that bombs were over 7 yds in the air?
seq004 Posted August 30, 2009 Author Posted August 30, 2009 I can't argue the fact that the first O has looked horrible. More horrible than ever.. But I will throw out a few things... - We have played a set of three of the toughest defenses in the league -- in the Titans, Bears and Steelers..all experienced in their scheme..all with playmakers. The Packers are switching schemes but have one of the godfather's of the 3-4 as the D coordinator. - For most of the preseason we have been missing what Dickie and Turk said we needed and what we actually acquired -- another key weapon. TO will bring additional focus on the edge of the field and out of the middle. One less player is in the middle on every down and every defender in the middle has a little bit more ground to cover. That could make a huge difference. - The first O has played what is akin to about a full game in the four preseason games. I have seen a lot of middle runs, no crossing routes/picks, very few screens or draws. All things a team does to cover a bad offensive line. We have been more plain vanilla than a world full of Dick Jauron clones would be. We are always throwing deep in practice according to the video highlights -- why aren't we doing this in games. I just have this gnawing feeling in my gut that noone can be this bad.....if we are -- I think all of us should follow SDS to the bookie and bet that under 7...cause if we are truly this bad -- I would bet the under on 4 wins. This team just has too much talent for that...I swear.... Good points. I hope they prove to be valid come the season.
PDaDdy Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 If Edwards threw the ball to Rhodes on that play, it's a 20 yard gain at least. Watch the opposite endzone replay. Rhodes is coming across the middle breaking wide open as soon as Edwards is throwing the ball. In fact, I think later in the game they call the same play and actually throw it to Rhodes for a big gain. The coaching staff must have seen that on the INT play. WOW. Edwards hit someone on the move and in stride!?!?!?!? On top of that the person was actually NOT running out of bounds for no RAC potential?!?!? Alert the media!!!! Pretty much every other QB in the league does that on a regular basis
JoeF Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 Good points. I hope they prove to be valid come the season. If not -- 1984-5 will seem like good years......cause this team will set a new standard for Bills suckatude...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I still think this could be a decent to good offense, and that Trent will have a decent to good year, despite Turk and Jauron, who stink IMO. We really won't have any idea if this offense is any good until game 2-3. I doubt on MNF at the Pats we will do well. But we should be able to move the ball and score at home against the Bucs.
seq004 Posted August 30, 2009 Author Posted August 30, 2009 If not -- 1984-5 will seem like good years......cause this team will set a new standard for Bills suckatude... I had season tickets in 84, so that would be painful Joe but your right.
UB2SF Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 On the INT, Evans had single coverage deep down the right side. If Edwards was Rothlesberger (or Brady or Brees or Rivers or Manning etc), he would have stepped forward in the pocket and hit Evans about 40 yards downfield for a possible touchdown. But instead, in the words of Monty Python, "BURMA!" (Apologies to those of you who don't get the Python reference.)
iinii Posted August 30, 2009 Posted August 30, 2009 I disagree on the O-Line. Wood looks awesome, and Butler is a welcome addition to the scrubs they had before- as is Hangartner. No, the problem is the lack of downfield throws which is either Edwards lack of confidence, Schonert being a wimp w/his play-calling, or both. I don't know if Lee Evans even caught a pass this offseason. Does he still play w/the Bills? Owens certainly will be welcome, but it would really suck if Trent is relying solely on Owens for receiving help (from outside, first glances, it would appear so) as Owens does have a tendency of missing some games w/injuries. As I posted elsewhere, if this is what we get this season, then Jauron, GUY, and Modrak must go. Brandon should be moved out of GM duties, and a real GM/ Coach should be brought in. Shanahan, Holmgren, and Cowher are the only names worth considering. Who is Evans?
Recommended Posts