San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Why can't Edwards get the ball to the receivers, and why can't the Bills stop the other teams? I think Edwards played a nice game, late sacks aside, but you can't have Moss and Welker having career days in the same game! And another things, with all the DBs drafted over the past four years, you would think the Bills would be able to stop someone's throwing game. Was that the game plan, force Brady to throw all night long?
DanInUticaTampa Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Well, first off, it was one game. 2nd, it was the pats* with brady, moss, and welker. I don't think it is any surprise by anyone that brady can throw to his recievers better than edwards.
The Big Cat Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Why can't Edwards get the ball to the receivers, and why can't the Bills stop the other teams? I think Edwards played a nice game, late sacks aside, but you can't have Moss and Welker having career days in the same game! And another things, with all the DBs drafted over the past four years, you would think the Bills would be able to stop someone's throwing game. Was that the game plan, force Brady to throw all night long? They used their receivers in short-routes, we used our TE's/RB's. What difference does it make?
DanInUticaTampa Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 because, you know, stats mean everything.....
The Big Cat Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 because, you know, stats mean everything..... Well, in this case, Moss/Welker with 24 catches, but still averaging under 10 ypc, that does mean something. I guess So-Cal just decided to stay on the surface with this one.
deep2evans Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Why can't Edwards get the ball to the receivers, and why can't the Bills stop the other teams? I think Edwards played a nice game, late sacks aside, but you can't have Moss and Welker having career days in the same game! And another things, with all the DBs drafted over the past four years, you would think the Bills would be able to stop someone's throwing game. Was that the game plan, force Brady to throw all night long? If you watched the game, you should be able to answer your own questions. Brady was throwing 3 yard out patterns all night - maybe 2 of those 24 receptions were more than 8 yards downfield. They had 13 points though 55 minutes and we had the game won - move on.
Orton's Arm Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Why can't Edwards get the ball to the receivers, and why can't the Bills stop the other teams? I think Edwards played a nice game, late sacks aside, but you can't have Moss and Welker having career days in the same game! And another things, with all the DBs drafted over the past four years, you would think the Bills would be able to stop someone's throwing game. Was that the game plan, force Brady to throw all night long? If other teams' DBs played as soft/far away from the guys they're covering as ours often do, Edwards' stats would look a lot better.
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Author Posted September 19, 2009 Well, in this case, Moss/Welker with 24 catches, but still averaging under 10 ypc, that does mean something. I guess So-Cal just decided to stay on the surface with this one. To go a little deeper, Evans seems to disappear way too often, and I had expected that with Owens now in the mix they would be able to get the ball to their # 1 and # 2 receivers, like a lot of people I am guessing. All the Evans people promoted the theory of getting a real # 2 on the other side, and teams wouldn't be able to just double Evans. I understand it's just one game, and Edwards did a nice job overall I thought, but shouldn't this staff be able to get the ball to the two big time players, or adjust, or something? Nice job by the O-line also: Clean up the penalties and they might have something there.
The Big Cat Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 To go a little deeper, Evans seems to disappear way too often, and I had expected that with Owens now in themix they would be able to get the ball to their # 1 and # 2 receivers, like a lot of people I am guessing. All the Evans people promoted the theory of getting a real # 2 on the other side, and teams wouldn't be able to just double Evans. I understand it's just one game, and Edwards did a nice job overall I thought, but shouldn't this staff be able to get the ball to the two big time players, or adjust, or something? Nice job by the O-line also: Clean up the penalties and they might have something there. Right, we didn't throw the ball to Evans or Owens. That's been well established. Both had key third down drops. But you do realize we had a receiver not-named Evans or Owens who averaged 16 yards a catch, right? You do also realize it's a freak occurrence when ANY combination of receivers on ANY team at ANY level has 24 receptions between the two of them? Sure, it sucks it happened against The Bills, but considering the parting of the NFL seas that was SUPPOSED to occur upon Jesus Brady's return, it's the far lesser of two evils (getting picked apart).
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Author Posted September 19, 2009 If other teams' DBs played as soft/far away from the guys they're covering as ours often do, Edwards' stats would look a lot better. I used to think that was a problem, but it appears to be the style or method they want. You play soft against a good QB, and they will carve you up sooner or later.
nucci Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Why can't Edwards get the ball to the receivers, and why can't the Bills stop the other teams? I think Edwards played a nice game, late sacks aside, but you can't have Moss and Welker having career days in the same game! And another things, with all the DBs drafted over the past four years, you would think the Bills would be able to stop someone's throwing game. Was that the game plan, force Brady to throw all night long? You're complaining about this now? Have you been asleep all week? Plus, the offense played pretty well.
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Author Posted September 19, 2009 Right, we didn't throw the ball to Evans or Owens. That's been well established. Both had key third down drops. But you do realize we had a receiver not-named Evans or Owens who averaged 16 yards a catch, right? Fast Freddie did a great job.
DanInUticaTampa Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 I understand it's just one game, and Edwards did a nice job overall I thought, but shouldn't this staff be able to get the ball to the two big time players, or adjust, or something? I think their are two reasons 1) bellichick came up with a game plan to limit owens and evans as much as possible. Not every coach is going to be able to plan it as well as he did. 2) Edwards, coming off a year where he was highly criticized, played it safe and didn't force the ball into the recievers' hands unless he was absolutly sure he could make the throw. Which i don't have a problem with most of the time, because it limits INTs. I think with lesser coached teams, coaches won't be able to cover both evans and TO as well as bellichick. I also think as edwards gets more confident, he will take more chances on more difficult throws. I honestly would rather of edwards played like he did last week rather than throwing interceptions or other crap. It was nice seeing him throw for 2tds.
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Author Posted September 19, 2009 I think their are two reasons 1) bellichick came up with a game plan to limit owens and evans as much as possible. Not every coach is going to be able to plan it as well as he did. 2) Edwards, coming off a year where he was highly criticized, played it safe and didn't force the ball into the recievers' hands unless he was absolutly sure he could make the throw. Which i don't have a problem with most of the time, because it limits INTs. I think with lesser coached teams, coaches won't be able to cover both evans and TO as well as bellichick. I also think as edwards gets more confident, he will take more chances on more difficult throws. I honestly would rather of edwards played like he did last week rather than throwing interceptions or other crap. It was nice seeing him throw for 2tds. Both good points. I'll look for Edwards to loosen up week by week, and start to get the WRs more involved in the passing game. Hopefully the O-line will improve and bolster his confidence also.
John Cocktosten Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Why can't Edwards get the ball to the receivers, and why can't the Bills stop the other teams? I think the better question to ask is why were screens, draws and play action working so well? Put simply, the Bills took what the Pats gave them. Now does that mean that there wasn't a throw or two downfield? Of course there was, but the Pats were playing Lee and TO over the top all game long and that is exactly why our screens, draws and PA worked so well. Those plays don't work when the D is in zone because the 2ndary is watching the play develop. When a D is playing man, the 2ndarys backs are turned, there is usually a blitz coming or the DE's have their ears pinned back which is perfect conditions for those 3 types of plays. SO instead of being discouraged, you should be glad that we have an OC who understands context. AVP did it without niche plays and used high percentage plays. He kept it simple and the entire game we had the Pats on their toes. The Bills dropped 3 3rd down passes and we did all of that without Lynch. If anything, I was blown away at the gameplan and the understanding that AVP showed during that game. Mark my words, there will be games when we will be throwing down the field all game long. Patience my friend!
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Author Posted September 19, 2009 I think the better question to ask is why were screens, draws and play action working so well?Put simply, the Bills took what the Pats gave them. Now does that mean that there wasn't a throw or two downfield? Of course there was, but the Pats were playing Lee and TO over the top all game long and that is exactly why our screens, draws and PA worked so well. Those plays don't work when the D is in zone because the 2ndary is watching the play develop. When a D is playing man, the 2ndarys backs are turned, there is usually a blitz coming or the DE's have their ears pinned back which is perfect conditions for those 3 types of plays. SO instead of being discouraged, you should be glad that we have an OC who understands context. AVP did it without niche plays and used high percentage plays. He kept it simple and the entire game we had the Pats on their toes. The Bills dropped 3 3rd down passes and we did all of that without Lynch. If anything, I was blown away at the gameplan and the understanding that AVP showed during that game. Mark my words, there will be games when we will be throwing down the field all game long. Patience my friend! Excellent post. I also think AVP did a great job, and this is being overlooked by most due to the way the game ended. For a 1st time OC, in his first game, to go up against the Pats, he did a very nice job. Buffalo will need to find a way to improve the TOP though, IMO.
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Author Posted September 19, 2009 QUOTE (John Cocktosten @ Sep 19 2009, 02:48 PM FYI: http://www.classmates.com/directory/public...egId=8700707632
John Cocktosten Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Excellent post. I also think AVP did a great job, and this is being overlooked by most due to the way the game ended. For a 1st time OC, in his first game, to go up against the Pats, he did a very nice job. Buffalo will need to find a way to improve the TOP though, IMO. Keep in mind mind that we are a no huddle team with a bend-dont-break defense. That is not a recipe for TOP. Something else that was overlooked was the difference that Lynch would've made in that game. Not because he's better than Jackson, but Jackson was gassed and if we pounded him all game long he wouldnt have been effective in the passing game.
San-O Posted September 19, 2009 Author Posted September 19, 2009 Keep in mind mind that we are a no huddle team with a bend-dont-break defense. That is not a recipe for TOP.Something else that was overlooked was the difference that Lynch would've made in that game. Not because he's better than Jackson, but Jackson was gassed and if we pounded him all game long he wouldnt have been effective in the passing game. Right, this is by design, and is a reason for much concern I believe. Some games the O is just not going to be in sync, and we have all seen what happens to the Buffalo D at the ends of games when they have been on the field too long. Sounds like a lot of close, but no cigar, late game losses to me.
John Cocktosten Posted September 19, 2009 Posted September 19, 2009 Right, this is by design, and is a reason for much concern I believe. Some games the O is just not going to be in sync, and we have all seen what happens to the Buffalo D at the ends of games when they have been on the field too long. Sounds like a lot of close, but no cigar, late game losses to me. I think the Bills are going to faze out the No Huddle as the seson goes on for that very reason. They also have an excuse by saying that was Turk's thing. I think it works in spots but as we lose our depth on D (I know your asking what depth?), I think we are in trouble. I think we should use it depending on the opponent. Especially against teams who run the 3-4 because your catching their big LB's and DL and that will cause problems in coverage underneath. We shall see. I was very nervous about AVP until that game, but now I'm excited to see what else he's got.
Recommended Posts