Sanners Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 I've seen all the preseason games. TO caught 2 fine passes at the top of game 1, and then disappeared. The affect of having him on the field is yet to be felt. I could sense that the Bills were not running anything except vanilla plays, merely for the sake of evaluating talent. I watched Bell in the game v. Chicago, and he looked really good. No mistakes, and athletic. The key to beating New England may be getting a pass rush on Brady. If they can pop him a few times, force a couple turnovers, the Bills can win that game. I agree 100%. I watched every game the Patriots played, and I didn't see a dominate team at all. In fact, I saw alot of play from their starters, that wasn't really impressive. Their secondary is weak, and their D-Line isn't that great either. I think Jauron is playing it perfect right now. Seems similar to what Belicheck does every year. Remove a big starter, and replace them with hungry young players. Funny, they get rid of Seymour, and all the blowhards say it makes sense; however the Bills are taking the same approach, by evaluating their team, before the season and making strong changes as well. I like it!!! Finally, this team is making a move! I know its not popular, but I think Dick Jauron is building a program. I just think its time to be positive! OPENING WEEKEND AGAINST THE PATS*!!! WHERE ARE OUR COLLECTIVE SACS!!!
Sanners Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 Or maybe it was because: - Walker was too fat - The tempo was too slow - The plays being called often made no sense for the situation (see crossing routes one game, none the next) - The calls were coming in from the Coord way too slow - The formations tipped the D off to the play - The O Coordnator wanted to run HIS show, not the coaches - It sounds like AVP is actually getting input from the positional coaches and players where is sounds like Turk wasn't - Under Turk the plays didn't call for downfield passing, under AVP they do (or so says T.O.) Did I miss anything? Nailed it. Turk sucked balls. I just wish Jauron made this move sooner. Loyal to a fault. He needs to work on that, however he has 6 games to prove himself.
Guest dog14787 Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 One thing the season opener has made perfectly clear is just how hard it is to score against some of the top notch defenses in the NFL, even when the offenses that are facing them are playoff caliber. Then there's the Patriots...
billsrcursed Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 The Giants did that by RUNNING & keeping the ball away from the Bills offense. The Pats* have one good RB in Fred Taylor. FAIL A healthy Maroney is better than present day Fred Taylor.... just sayin...
PNW_Bills_Fan Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 FAIL A healthy Maroney is better than present day Fred Taylor.... just sayin... But Maroney isn't all that good. If he was then the Pats would not have 16 running backs on their 53 man roster (I mean 5).
billsrcursed Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 But Maroney isn't all that good. If he was then the Pats would not have 16 running backs on their 53 man roster (I mean 5). Marony IS good, he just can't stay healthy. Really, all of their backs serve a different purpose, so I wouldn't go as far as to say them having that many backs is a direct reflection on any one's performance, but moreso their individual responsibilities to the offense/special teams. It may seem rediculous to us that they have so many backs, but it seems to work for them, so maybe they're on to something. It shocks me to no end that we don't use our backs more often in passing plays (aside from the all too often last resort check down). I'd like to see more designed plays with Lynch AND Jackson serving as WR's. That would probably get Trent killed, though, as there wouldn't be our much needed "extra blocker"....
NewEra Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 FAIL A healthy Maroney is better than present day Fred Taylor.... just sayin... i don't think you watch too many pats games...or jags for that matter. you're crazy
billsrcursed Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 i don't think you watch too many pats games...or jags for that matter. you're crazy Check my location, you're wrong. I know Taylor WAS good, and I'm not saying he isn't still productive. BUT, when Maroney is healthy, he's a play maker with great pass-catching abilities. I'm also an Ohio ST. fan and watched Maroney plenty in college, so regardless of what your opinion is of both, Maroney is younger, quicker, and overall better at both of their stages of their career. Again, this is all based on a healthy Maroney, which has been quite a problem with him, no doubt.
fansince88 Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 Fred Jackson says in this report that "we know what we are doing now." That is the best news I've heard in a while. Walker was never going to work in the no huddle even at RT. This line is now set-up to run a fast tempo offense - no fat slobs. We now have an athletic left tackle. Fred Jackson may be a better running back for this offense than Lynch. We have the receivers. Hopefully the QB. We now have a coordinator that understands how to run the no huddle. Buffalo Bills.com Daffy duck said it this way: "now I know what I did wrong, first the waddind than the powder, pack it down tight! BOOM!! I hope it isnt like that!
SlamnSam Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 haha I saw that too and just started shaking my head Everything has an ebb and flow. Nothing stays the same no matter how much you like it.
MDH Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 Personally, I'd prefer to see the no huddle run at a slower, Colts like, pace. I don't want the offense to be out on the field for one minute drives when they go three and out. This defense, as we've seen in the past, doesn't get off the field. Even when they force teams to punt they allow plenty of first downs in the process. With the no huddle on offense that D is going to get no time to rest and be totally gassed by the 2nd half.
Guest dog14787 Posted September 11, 2009 Posted September 11, 2009 Personally, I'd prefer to see the no huddle run at a slower, Colts like, pace. I don't want the offense to be out on the field for one minute drives when they go three and out. This defense, as we've seen in the past, doesn't get off the field. Even when they force teams to punt they allow plenty of first downs in the process. With the no huddle on offense that D is going to get no time to rest and be totally gassed by the 2nd half. I agree, instead of wearing down our opponents defense, we wear down our own defense. I will say this though, against some of the better defenses in the NFL the no huddle helps. According to Big Ben last night, running the no huddle, something they had been practicing on, allowed him to move down the field and score. Catching teams unprepared is one of the reasons why the no huddle works, but its like play calling. If you try to rush every single play the element of surprise is lost. Peyton manning has perfected the no huddle and can still use proper clock management while he uses it and much could be learned by observing his pace and the amount of time alterations he makes in between plays.
Recommended Posts