billsfan89 Posted September 18, 2009 Posted September 18, 2009 When we got TO everyone expected the Bills to be more vertical with their O. But if every team does what the Pats* did on Monday do we really need to be a vertical passing team? If tight ends, slot guys, and running backs are open because safeties are so focused on Evans and TO then does Trent need to throw deep or should he just take what the D gives him. I think as long as a team is going to defend like the Pats* why not? You can't force something that isn't there. TO could still go over the middle while Evans can do cruel routs and go over the mid level middle of the field. I would like to see this team go vertical as long as the defense is there to take advantage of it. My point is going vertical might not always be the prudent thing to do for Trent and CO.
TheChimp Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Look, they play off the line, you run it down their throats, until they are forced to lay off the double coverage and then you exploit THAT. Key is to have the ball enough times to DO all that, and THAT is up to the defense. So, to answer your question, with THIS defense, you take whatever they give you and try to score FAST, because you ain't gettin the ball back anytime soon.
Estro Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 I know I'm not going out on a limb by saying this, but the Bills need to have success in the passing game in order to win this game. If Trent has a bad outing we will lose a close one. If we come out and have success throwing the ball downfield to the receivers it could be a lopsided win for Buffalo. Really hoping for the second one.
thewildrabbit Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 When we got TO everyone expected the Bills to be more vertical with their O. But if every team does what the Pats* did on Monday do we really need to be a vertical passing team? If tight ends, slot guys, and running backs are open because safeties are so focused on Evans and TO then does Trent need to throw deep or should he just take what the D gives him. I think as long as a team is going to defend like the Pats* why not? You can't force something that isn't there. TO could still go over the middle while Evans can do cruel routs and go over the mid level middle of the field. I would like to see this team go vertical as long as the defense is there to take advantage of it. My point is going vertical might not always be the prudent thing to do for Trent and CO. The thing is, with TO injured during the preseason it also hampered Edwards and TO rapport and ability to sense and understand each others nuances. A good example of this is that the Patriots added 14 year veteran WR Joey Galloway in the off season and although he is listed as the 3rd receiver on the depth chart, he has yet to make any big catches. Tom Brady and Galloway have yet to get on the same page and he played the entire preseason with Brady throwing to him. Stating that, it might take a few weeks for both Edwards and TO to get into sync, where Edwards can feel comfortable throwing to TO. Hopefully, the sooner the better
transient Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 The thing is, with TO injured during the preseason it also hampered Edwards and TO rapport and ability to sense and understand each others nuances. A good example of this is that the Patriots added 14 year veteran WR Joey Galloway in the off season and although he is listed as the 3rd receiver on the depth chart, he has yet to make any big catches. Tom Brady and Galloway have yet to get on the same page and he played the entire preseason with Brady throwing to him. Stating that, it might take a few weeks for both Edwards and TO to get into sync, where Edwards can feel comfortable throwing to TO. Hopefully, the sooner the better Personally, given the addition of Springs which may have been in part a response to our signing of TO, I believe NE's* intent was not to let us get anything deep. I don't think they counted on their D-line to look as poor as it did. They also did not deviate from this strategy during the game. In the end, were it not for the obvious, it would have cost them. However, if they would have stacked the line and dropped the double coverage of TO and LE, it likely also would have cost them. I don't know that all teams will have the defensive depth or schemes double TWO receivers effectively for the entire game without getting burned. Also, now that AVP has seen this, he will hopefully add a few options that take advantage of some of our other receivers in deeper patterns, and force teams to play a little more honestly on TO and LE, or get burned by Reed, Parrish, or Jackson. I had mentioned in another thread that I would love to see them motion Jackson out of the backfield to the line to use as a fourth or even fifth receiver, as they used to do with Thurman.
Bufcomments Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Thing is teams dont think Fred Jackson can beat them right now. And by rushing for less than 60 yds teams are gonna cover Lee and T.O until Marshawn comes back. I love Jackson dont get me wrong but until teams respect our running game this is gonna happen. Things will be different when Marshawn comes back trust.
transient Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Thing is teams dont think Fred Jackson can beat them right now. And by rushing for less than 60 yds teams are gonna cover Lee and T.O until Marshawn comes back. I love Jackson dont get me wrong but until teams respect our running game this is gonna happen. Things will be different when Marshawn comes back trust. After the way the Pats* were talking him up after the game, and the total yards that Fred put together, I wouldn't be surprised if defenses start to take note before ML returns.
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Look, they play off the line, you run it down their throats, until they are forced to lay off the double coverage and then you exploit THAT. Key is to have the ball enough times to DO all that, and THAT is up to the defense. So, to answer your question, with THIS defense, you take whatever they give you and try to score FAST, because you ain't gettin the ball back anytime soon. The defense looked pretty damn good against the best offense in the league Monday night.
Coach Klein Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 The defense looked pretty damn good against the best offense in the league Monday night. until the last 5 minutes of the game i agree completely.
DanInUticaTampa Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 the whole team fell apart in the last 5 minutes. special teams, defense, and offense.
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 the whole team fell apart in the last 5 minutes. special teams, defense, and offense. If someone (coaching staff/Jauron) tells McLuvin' to fair catch the ball, or stay away from it, or take it out and slide down, or just run off the field, the game is basically over. I heard Jauron after the game say he "supported" McLuvin's decision to run the ball out? Wow, that's great Dick. Nice passive way to manage a game and a situation. Keep up the good work. P.S. Look for McLuvin to keep fielding those long kicks and keep your fingers crossed.
Clippers of Nfl Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 the answer is yes. even if we can do it with runs and screens, trent needs to have a hellava year with his passing stats. this game should be good "practice" for the games where the secondary may not be as weak. i just hope we dont see too many 3 and outs! go bills!
Recommended Posts