Alphadawg7 Posted September 15, 2009 Posted September 15, 2009 Look what Tom Brady did. They didn't let him go deep once, so he threw underneath all night long. That is what you do. The difference is that Tom was throwing underneat to Moss and Welker...while we on the under hand targeted Freddie a total 7 times and Lee and Owens had only 7 targets COMBINED. When your RB is the leader in passing targets you won win many games and score many points. I am not saying it was Trent, but its either him or AVP or both...someone on this dam team needs to find a way to put the ball into the hands of our 2 most dangerous players in Evans and Owens.
Flbillsfan#1 Posted September 15, 2009 Posted September 15, 2009 Trent looked GOOD on TWO Drives PERIOD. The rest of the game he was mediocre. If he could have at least sustained a few drives maybe the defense would have had something left in the 4th Quarter. Listening to Bucs radio today, everyone is saying "Well Edwards is NO Romo". The Bucs held the Boys to 6 points until there were less than 2 min. left in the 1st half. I think the game next week could go either way but if you guys at the game give the Bills homefield advantage the Bills will pull it out. Go Bills.
Guest dog14787 Posted September 15, 2009 Posted September 15, 2009 Come on Dog...come back to reality. Its posts like this that get you slammed so much on this board. The drop by Freddie was way out in front on him and the only reason he had a chance to catch it was becasue he used his finger tips to tip it back to himself. That was a bad pass, not a "perfect" pass. The drop by T.O. required TO to jump a foot in the air and catch it near his face mask still after he beat his defender by 2 yards...he still should have caught it, but it was no where near "perfect" and they even said it was a bad pass on NFL Live today. The drop by Lee wasnt a flat out drop, it was dropped because he got hammered by the DB at the moment he caught it because Trent got him the ball too late. If he gets the ball to Lee sooner Lee makes that catch. So please, the "perfect passes" thing is silly, not to mention your claim that we win if we catch those when none of those plays even get us over the 50 let alone into scoring range. But the silliest comment is your comment about how no other QB can go into NE and play well enough to beat the Pats...thats one of the dumbest things you have put on here. You act like the Pats are undefeated in the Tom Brady era at home...not to mention, this defense is a SHELL of what it was in 2007 missing 7 of its BEST players from that D. I know you have a boy crush on Trent, but try and keep a little dose of reality in your posts and you wont get slammed so much. Seriously, you shouldn't even be allowed to post on this board in my opinion. Calling me a pedophile is serious business and I just hope you would have the nerve to say it face to face if you ever happen to see me at a Bills game. (maybe I should go back and report it) I don't give a F%$K what you think.
SF Bills Fan Posted September 15, 2009 Posted September 15, 2009 My initial reaction is that he played well. I wouldn't say great. I would say solid and effective. Enough to get the win and he didn't make mistakes. If he plays that way all the time we will win some tough games. Now my question is- was it just that T.O. and Evans were covered or did Trent just not see them open or did he just not even try except for the few glaring drops? I was curious as to why there were not more big attempts. I kept waiting and waiting and they didn't happen.
bizell Posted September 15, 2009 Posted September 15, 2009 Edwards played well enough to win. Great? I don't think so. The notion that "Oh, our wideouts were doubled by having safeties over the top so we can't throw to them" is bull sh--. If that's a surefire way of taking a player out of the game, why don't all defenses just do that to Randy Moss? Steve Smith? Reggie Wayne? In any event, this is a positive game for Edwards and hopefully he builds on it.
Mike in Syracuse Posted September 15, 2009 Author Posted September 15, 2009 Edwards played well enough to win. Great? I don't think so. The notion that "Oh, our wideouts were doubled by having safeties over the top so we can't throw to them" is bull sh--. If that's a surefire way of taking a player out of the game, why don't all defenses just do that to Randy Moss? Steve Smith? Reggie Wayne? In any event, this is a positive game for Edwards and hopefully he builds on it. Oh come on, give the guy some credit. He fired two passes, one to Owens and one to Evans that hit them both in the hands and they dropped them. Not to mention the ones that were called back because of the idiotic penalties.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 The difference is that Tom was throwing underneat to Moss and Welker...while we on the under hand targeted Freddie a total 7 times and Lee and Owens had only 7 targets COMBINED. When your RB is the leader in passing targets you won win many games and score many points. I am not saying it was Trent, but its either him or AVP or both...someone on this dam team needs to find a way to put the ball into the hands of our 2 most dangerous players in Evans and Owens. The difference is that we ran a ZONE all night and the Pats were in a variation of man to man called DOUBLE COVERAGE on Lee and TO all night. Alphadawg shut your ignorant face. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. None whatsoever.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 Edwards played well enough to win. Great? I don't think so. The notion that "Oh, our wideouts were doubled by having safeties over the top so we can't throw to them" is bull sh--. If that's a surefire way of taking a player out of the game, why don't all defenses just do that to Randy Moss? Steve Smith? Reggie Wayne? In any event, this is a positive game for Edwards and hopefully he builds on it. Because then they get torched underneath you !@#$ing retard, just like the Pats did. Every team we face is going to have to deal with that conundrum, and as long as Trent shows he is willing to take the underneath sh-- and make you pay for it, teams will have no choice but to play up and take away the high percentage plays, leaving TO and Lee in one on one, where we can legitimately throw to them. Don't you wonder how our TEs and backs could be so wide open time and time again, and BB didn't have his team adjusting to shut us down? It is because the DBs were ALL down field covering Lee and TO. The cause and effect here really is not that hard to understand....don't you find it embarrassing that everyone around you can't understand how you can be so dumb? When the QB has a 114 passer rating for the game, you really sound !@#$ing stupid to second guess him.
bizell Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 Oh come on, give the guy some credit. He fired two passes, one to Owens and one to Evans that hit them both in the hands and they dropped them. Not to mention the ones that were called back because of the idiotic penalties. On both those occasions, the passes were on target and probably should have been caught. However, there are 11 guys playing against the offense that are getting paid, too. On TO's pass, Bodden was directly in front of TO and going to smack him good if he caught it. I think TO caught him in his vision, and that had a lot to do with the drop. On Evans' attempt, Bodden walloped Evans. Sometimes the D just makes a great play. Again, Edwards didn't play great, but he did play well enough to win. We have to involve the WRs more and not just 'take what they give'.
McBeane Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 The difference is that we ran a ZONE all night and the Pats were in a variation of man to man called DOUBLE COVERAGE on Lee and TO all night. Alphadawg shut your ignorant face. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. None whatsoever. Finally... someone realizes what was really happening last night. Tom Brady would have had a tough time throwing to Lee and TO last night too the way the Patriots were sticking to them. AVP has been the coordinator for what, 12 days now? It will come, patience grasshoppers.
bizell Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 Because then they get torched underneath you !@#$ing retard, just like the Pats did. Every team we face is going to have to deal with that conundrum, and as long as Trent shows he is willing to take the underneath sh-- and make you pay for it, teams will have no choice but to play up and take away the high percentage plays, leaving TO and Lee in one on one, where we can legitimately throw to them. When the QB has a 114 passer rating for the game, you really sound !@#$ing stupid to second guess him. torched to the tune of 212 yards? if that's your definition of "torching", then 18 teams in the league got their pass defense torched just like the Patriots did yesterday. I think the QB rating stat is misleading sometimes, especially in times like this when a quarterback throws a 1 yard pass, and the running back runs 25 yards. Look, I said I thought Edwards did well, I don't really know what else you want from me.
Catholic Guilt Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 I thought Trent played VERY well. He was sharp and made quick decisions. This O-line gave him some time, but kudos for the quick passes to the flat AND the screens.
Alphadawg7 Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 The difference is that we ran a ZONE all night and the Pats were in a variation of man to man called DOUBLE COVERAGE on Lee and TO all night. Alphadawg shut your ignorant face. You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. None whatsoever. Dude, whats with attitude, I never said anything to you, but whatever. Secondly, it doesnt matter what defense you run on the Pats, they STILL run their WR's open underneath the coverage against EVERY D and team in the league...so take your zone comment and rethink the simplicity of what you are saying. And it just goes to show what little you know because double coverage on the wideouts almost always comes from the FS and or SS, which is WHY New England runs Moss and Welker UNDERNEATH so they can break and catch BEFORE the double coverage comes. And you cant just play them short becuase they will come OVER THE TOP and burn you, and that is what makes NE so dam dangerous. We DIDNT run Owens and Evans much on quick slants and crossing routes underneath to beat the double coverage, there fore we had a TOTAL, yes a TOTAL of 7 targets to our 2 best offensive weapons while NE had TWENTY EIGHT targets to just Moss and Welker alone (and that is 3 more than Trent had passing attempts). And they do this against the zone and man to man. If you are getting your mid to deep routes taken away on double coverage, you run your WR's on short quick slants and crossing routes...unfortunately we didnt make this adjustment therefore our WR's didnt exist. The worst part is that underneath and over the middle are Owens bread and butter yet we targeted him a measly 3 times... You have no idea how to beat Man or double coverage, so keep your ignorant comments to yourself please.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 torched to the tune of 212 yards? if that's your definition of "torching", then 18 teams in the league got their pass defense torched just like the Patriots did yesterday. I think the QB rating stat is misleading sometimes, especially in times like this when a quarterback throws a 1 yard pass, and the running back runs 25 yards. Look, I said I thought Edwards did well, I don't really know what else you want from me. He threw for over 8 yards per attempt, which by any standard in the league, is absolutely torching it. Why would the QB rating stat be misleading? It is the most comprehensive of all QB stats as it takes into account the widest range of dynamics that affect a football game. So to base your argument on the fact that 212 yards isn't good, and to ignore the 8+ yards per attempt while saying QB rating is misleading, is both hypocrisy and unbelievable ignorance. Thus, I want you to either a) become more aware of the philosophy and dynamics of a football game, or b) stop pretending you have a valid opinion.
McBeane Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 You people on this board frustrate me so much. Trent had arguably the best game of his career so far, in Gillette Stadium, on Monday Night, the first game of the season and the first time he has really run the no-huddle. Why can't anyone give praise to OUR quarterback? He played a hell of a game and if we can get nearly that every week, we are set for years. I don't know about most of you on this board, but I love my Bills. I bleed red and blue. We lost, so what. There are 15 games left to play this year. Why be so negative about the team that you supposedly love. Enough with all the damn pessimism and learn to love your Bills. Have fun with being part of the best fan base in the NFL. We played a hell of a game last night and I am damn proud of our team. I may be in the minority, but I am optimistic for the next 16 weeks. Its a long year, with a lot of success ahead. LETS GO BILLS BABY!!!!!!
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 Dude, whats with attitude, I never said anything to you, but whatever. Secondly, it doesnt matter what defense you run on the Pats, they STILL run their WR's open underneath the coverage against EVERY D and team in the league...so take your zone comment and rethink the simplicity of what you are saying. And it just goes to show what little you know because double coverage on the wideouts almost always comes from the FS and or SS, which is WHY New England runs Moss and Welker UNDERNEATH so they can break and catch BEFORE the double coverage comes. And you cant just play them short becuase they will come OVER THE TOP and burn you, and that is what makes NE so dam dangerous. We DIDNT run Owens and Evans much on quick slants and crossing routes underneath to beat the double coverage, there fore we had a TOTAL, yes a TOTAL of 7 targets to our 2 best offensive weapons while NE had TWENTY EIGHT targets to just Moss and Welker alone (and that is 3 more than Trent had passing attempts). And they do this against the zone and man to man. If you are getting your mid to deep routes taken away on double coverage, you run your WR's on short quick slants and crossing routes...unfortunately we didnt make this adjustment therefore our WR's didnt exist. The worst part is that underneath and over the middle are Owens bread and butter yet we targeted him a measly 3 times... You have no idea how to beat Man or double coverage, so keep your ignorant comments to yourself please. LOL football lesson from Alphadawg. I would say that Trent tore up their double coverage, and the game plan worked marvelously. I know that you throw the ball where the defense is weakest, and that is how you beat any coverage. Alphadawg my knowledge is quite obviously far superior to your own. Every point you make is inane and grasping at desperate straws in a feeble attempt to play the devil's advocate. Your posts seethe with stupidity and really man I am embarrassed to even say I like the same team as you. How hard is it to realize that when your two WRs are taking 4 DBs out of the game, all you have to do is hit easy to read, high percentage passing routes to backs who have dubious mismatches against LBs? I mean my god man. Could you be any less capable of understanding simple strategic concepts?
26CornerBlitz Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 I'll really be sold on Trent if and when he consistently: 1) throws the ball in rhythm with timing and anticipation. 2) demonstrates that he can manipulate coverage with his eyes. 3) makes good decisions. 4) demonstrates ball security (minimize stupid picks and fumbles).
Alphadawg7 Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 Because then they get torched underneath you !@#$ing retard, just like the Pats did. Every team we face is going to have to deal with that conundrum, and as long as Trent shows he is willing to take the underneath sh-- and make you pay for it, teams will have no choice but to play up and take away the high percentage plays, leaving TO and Lee in one on one, where we can legitimately throw to them. Don't you wonder how our TEs and backs could be so wide open time and time again, and BB didn't have his team adjusting to shut us down? It is because the DBs were ALL down field covering Lee and TO. The cause and effect here really is not that hard to understand....don't you find it embarrassing that everyone around you can't understand how you can be so dumb? When the QB has a 114 passer rating for the game, you really sound !@#$ing stupid to second guess him. Ok...this post made it all make sense...you are obviously between the ages of 12 and 17 judging by how you write and the ignorant comments. Anyone with any real knowledge of football knows that the QB rating (which is hated by most players and analysts for the way its constructed) is an unreliable way to guage a QB's performance that day. I am not saying Trent had a bad day, but the sheer statement about the rating shows you dont understand what you are talking about. Case in point: Brady: 378 yards, 2TD's, 1INT = 97.8 Trent: 212 yards, 2TD's, 0INT = 114.1 Who had the better game? Brady, and I will take his production all day over Trents and yet his "rating" was almost 17 points lower... Here is another fun fact about the rating: If Brady threw FOUR TD's last night with the same attempts, completions yards and the 1 INT, he would STILL have a lower rating than Trent...thats how stupid the rating system is. Are you telling me a QB who goes for 221, 2 TD's, and 0 INT's is better outing than a QB who goes for 378 yards, 4 TD's, 1 INT? So take your retard comments you are giving everyone and look in the mirror Corky...
bizell Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 He threw for over 8 yards per attempt, which by any standard in the league, is absolutely torching it. Why would the QB rating stat be misleading? It is the most comprehensive of all QB stats as it takes into account the widest range of dynamics that affect a football game. So to base your argument on the fact that 212 yards isn't good, and to ignore the 8+ yards per attempt while saying QB rating is misleading, is both hypocrisy and unbelievable ignorance. Thus, I want you to either a) become more aware of the philosophy and dynamics of a football game, or b) stop pretending you have a valid opinion. I never said he didn't do good. I never said "QB rating is misleading", I said "in certain cases QB rating is misleading". I don't think the QB rating is indicative of the performance of the quarterbacks last night. I already explained why I think that it isn't representative of their performances. According to the QB rating, Edwards handily outplayed Tom Brady. Is that what happened? I don't think so. Did Edwards play well enough to win? Yes he did.
Alphadawg7 Posted September 16, 2009 Posted September 16, 2009 LOL football lesson from Alphadawg. I would say that Trent tore up their double coverage, and the game plan worked marvelously. I know that you throw the ball where the defense is weakest, and that is how you beat any coverage. Alphadawg my knowledge is quite obviously far superior to your own. Every point you make is inane and grasping at desperate straws in a feeble attempt to play the devil's advocate. Your posts seethe with stupidity and really man I am embarrassed to even say I like the same team as you. How hard is it to realize that when your two WRs are taking 4 DBs out of the game, all you have to do is hit easy to read, high percentage passing routes to backs who have dubious mismatches against LBs? I mean my god man. Could you be any less capable of understanding simple strategic concepts? You are dumber than I originally thought...If that was the case then the leading WR's in the NFL would be RB's...
Recommended Posts