mountainwampus Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Did anyone notice that most of the Saints first drive yardage was on McKelvin's blown coverage (2x)? Then he gets injured, and (edit:) Florence takes over, and our defense was able to stop them consistently until late in the game. I think McKelvin's biggest problem is he's not very smart, can't "read" a route very well. And don't forget, he fumbled TWICE against New England (Nic Harris recovered first one) as if he was being paid to purposely fumble (Must. Not. Let. Knee. Go. Down. until. ball. is. Loose!) McKelvin... You ARE the weakest link!
JJBuffalo Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Did anyone notice that most of the Saints first drive yardage was on McKelvin's blown coverage (2x)? Then he gets injured, and Youboty takes over, and our defense was able to stop them consistently until late in the game. I think McKelvin's biggest problem is he's not very smart, can't "read" a route very well. And don't forget, he fumbled TWICE against New England (Nic Harris recovered first one) as if he was being paid to purposely fumble (Must. Not. Let. Knee. Go. Down. until. ball. is. Loose!) McKelvin... You ARE the weakest link! I dont think Youboty took over. I'm pretty sure it was Drayton Florence # 29.
Phlegm Alley Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 It was quite obvious that the Saints were going after McKelvin on the first drive. The pump and go where McKelvin bit hard and lead to a 31 yard gain to Colsten is what comes to mind. Combine the effects of what happened to him against NE, along with his injury and subsequent time missed, I think he is going to be a non-factor this year and not taking the "next step" that many of us fans had hoped for before the season started.
mountainwampus Posted September 29, 2009 Author Posted September 29, 2009 I dont think Youboty took over. I'm pretty sure it was Drayton Florence # 29. My bad. BTW, Florence made some great plays.
billsfreak Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 It is starting to look like McFumble has been overated a little bit by over excited Bills fans desperate for some exciting play. Starting to look a little fragile too, not starting off to be the best of years for him is it-2 fumble game at NE, including the game loser, his property gets vandalized, gets burned and broken against the Saints. Whats next?
bizell Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 guys, it was verified that one of the two fumbles against NE was a bad call.
billsfreak Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 guys, it was verified that one of the two fumbles against NE was a bad call. The only bad call was him bringing it out of the endzone.
bizell Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 The only bad call was him bringing it out of the endzone. naah, that wasn't actually a bad play imo. his error was fighting for those extra two yards when he should have just gone down.
Conch Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 naah, that wasn't actually a bad play imo. his error was fighting for those extra two yards when he should have just gone down. IMO if the entire return team is playing up for an onsides kick and you get the ball three yards deep in the EZ, the chance that you will break it big are slim to none. Take a freaking knee or at least run toward the out of bounds with the ball in the outside arm. The error was coaching. Add to that a lack of football smarts on the part of the player. He wanted to be a big hero and turned out to be a big goat. That said, we would have gone three and out and Brady would have marched it down our throats to win at the last second. Who are we kidding, this coaching staff does not know how to win a close game.
dave mcbride Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Apparently, the Pats' gameplan going into the final game of last season was to throw, throw, throw at McKelvin, who Belichick thought was a huge liability in coverage. Because of the severe wind, they couldn't.
bizell Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Apparently, the Pats' gameplan going into the final game of last season was to throw, throw, throw at McKelvin, who Belichick thought was a huge liability in coverage. Because of the severe wind, they couldn't. attack a rookie cornerback? i wouldn't be surprised.
rstencel Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Considering he broke his leg, we will get a chance to see what the defense looks like without him. I think he is a good corner who takes some chances, and gets burned because of that once in awhile. The fumble probably didn't help with his confidence however, and Corner backs are only as good as their confidence, which is why most of the good ones are so cocky. Really don't think he was the weak link on the defense, however. The line-backing core isn't great, and they have allot of responsibilities in coverage. The Safeties also haven't done a great job with their over the top help. This type of defense doesn't leave the corners on an island much, or at least in not supposed to. So the corners have allot of room to take chances as they are supposed to be getting help either inside or deep on almost every play. Not sure what play was being run, but he may have been expecting over the top help and that is why he bit so hard on the double move. Also have to put some of that on the D-Line, double moves take time to develop usually, and the line should be putting good pressure on the QB by the time he is getting ready to let it go. They did better against the Saints than had first couple of weeks, but wore down by end of game, just like against the Pats. I blame that on the offense partially, since they have played a big part in the defense having to play allot of minutes.
Peter Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 Although there are times that I have been disappointed in him as well, let's not forget that he was injured going into the game (ankle, I believe). That might have had some effect on him.
theranter Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 McKelvin looked bad all preseason, despite his two picks. Last year, he often displayed rare talent, so he probably wasn't a bad pick. I think what we got here is a sophmore slump.
Estro Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 This is why drafting Leodis with the #11 overall pick and letting Jabari walk the very next season was very foolish. Leodis signed a 5 year $19.4 million with $12.6 million guarenteed, while Jabari got 4 years $23 million with roughly $10 million guarenteed. Similar contracts espcially when you consider Jabari's guarenteed money. I don't understand the Bills thinking in not locking Greer up and using the #11 pick on another area of weakness. Some fans will say, "yeah but we didn't know if greer was good when we drafted Leodis", but that is simply not true. The guy had obvious playmaking ability and starter potential and that was obvious. So who would you rather have Greer and the #11 pick to use on someone else or Leodis McKelvin?
C.Biscuit97 Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 This is why drafting Leodis with the #11 overall pick and letting Jabari walk the very next season was very foolish. Leodis signed a 5 year $19.4 million with $12.6 million guarenteed, while Jabari got 4 years $23 million with roughly $10 million guarenteed. Similar contracts espcially when you consider Jabari's guarenteed money. I don't understand the Bills thinking in not locking Greer up and using the #11 pick on another area of weakness. Some fans will say, "yeah but we didn't know if greer was good when we drafted Leodis", but that is simply not true. The guy had obvious playmaking ability and starter potential and that was obvious. So who would you rather have Greer and the #11 pick to use on someone else or Leodis McKelvin? 1) They tried to re-sign Greer but the Saints gave him more money. 2) McKelvin has played less than a season as a starter. I hate the lack of patience fans have now.
billsfreak Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 naah, that wasn't actually a bad play imo. his error was fighting for those extra two yards when he should have just gone down. I agree that that was an error too, but his second one on that play, he should have kneeled down without any doubt.
billsfreak Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 1) They tried to re-sign Greer but the Saints gave him more money. 2) McKelvin has played less than a season as a starter. I hate the lack of patience fans have now. They tried to resign Greer the same whay the tried to resign Pat Williams, Antoine Winfield, Nate Clements, etc. hoping they would sign contract with a huge hometown discount, of which normally gets taken as an insult.
Jerry Jabber Posted September 29, 2009 Posted September 29, 2009 This is why drafting Leodis with the #11 overall pick and letting Jabari walk the very next season was very foolish. Leodis signed a 5 year $19.4 million with $12.6 million guarenteed, while Jabari got 4 years $23 million with roughly $10 million guarenteed. Similar contracts espcially when you consider Jabari's guarenteed money. I don't understand the Bills thinking in not locking Greer up and using the #11 pick on another area of weakness. Some fans will say, "yeah but we didn't know if greer was good when we drafted Leodis", but that is simply not true. The guy had obvious playmaking ability and starter potential and that was obvious. So who would you rather have Greer and the #11 pick to use on someone else or Leodis McKelvin? Last year, we could have used a dominating DE (especially how bad the pass rush last season), that way this season, the DE would have a year under his belt and producing more.
Recommended Posts