eSJayDee Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 “We were upset with the amount of rushing yards they had, but the vast majority was on just two plays,” said Paul Posluszny. Yeah. Eliminate those 2 carries & you only let up about 180 yds and 5 yds per carry.
nucci Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Yeah. Eliminate those 2 carries & you only let up about 180 yds and 5 yds per carry. and 1 was a for TD!!! Idiot.
l< j Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Yeah. Eliminate those 2 carries & you only let up about 180 yds and 5 yds per carry. Which would be a huge step forward for their run D. A matter of perspective, I guess.
Cash Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 If you don't count the two times I cheated on my girlfriend, I've been a great boyfriend. Also, could we get a math tutor in here for Poz? 60+71 = 131. That is not "the vast majority" of 318.
quikchomp Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 If you don't count the two times I cheated on my girlfriend, I've been a great boyfriend. Also, could we get a math tutor in here for Poz? 60+71 = 131. That is not "the vast majority" of 318. Because I'm sure he had the numbers in front of him.
HelloNewman Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 “We were upset with the amount of rushing yards they had, but the vast majority was on just two plays,” said Paul Posluszny. Typical Jauron coached player full of excuses and low on expectations
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 “We were upset with the amount of rushing yards they had, but the vast majority was on just two plays,” said Paul Posluszny. Typical Jauron coached player full of excuses and low on expectations If we had Poz and Kiawaka on the outside LB positions and got a big/tough MLB in draft I would be ok with next year at this position. Keith could be a backup/4th LB in case of injuries as we are undersized here I think right now. Poz is too small and seems injury prone yet seems real fast and could do the OLB position as he is goo din coverage.
Lori Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Not sure where that quote is from. Here's how Chuck Pollock wrote it: ... But Posluszny was realistic about the 16-13 victory."We didn't play perfect by any means," he said. "There were a lot of rushing yards we left out there and would like to have back, but what it came down to was that we made the plays we needed to win the game." Of course he didn't know how many yards were surrendered, and when told the total was 318, Poz was stunned. "That might be a first," he said incredulously of winning despite that statistic. "We won the game, but we've got to correct that. We can't continue to do that and expect to win games. We're going to have to take a hard look at that because 300 yards rushing ... the vast majority was on their two big plays where we didn't play our gaps. "We made the big plays, but stopping the run, that's basic football. We were upset with the amount of rushing yards they had." (I'll add the link when they put it online.) Sounds a little different in context, no?
Dr. Trooth Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Fabio is highly overrated. Aside from QB, the weakest position on the Bills is clearly linebacker. The entire linebacking core needs to be flipped in lieu of real linebackers, that actually hit, foam at the mouth, create havoc, and have bad intentions.
BuffaloBill Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Sounds a little different in context, no? Yep
Lv-Bills Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Yeah. Eliminate those 2 carries & you only let up about 180 yds and 5 yds per carry. This is probably exactly what you get when you play for a "coddling" coaching staff. Instead of looking at things and really finding out what went wrong, you get this crap. Wonder what Rex Ryan, Tony Sparano or Bill Belicheck would have told the Bills regarding their run defense yesterday? I bet none of the Bills would have said what Poz said. This whole organization lacks accountability. What a mess.
Lv-Bills Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Not sure where that quote is from. Here's how Chuck Pollock wrote it: (I'll add the link when they put it online.) Sounds a little different in context, no? It kinda does, but if he truly still said the vast majority was on their two run plays, then no, it sounds just as dumb. I couldn't tell if that was actually added by the writer or Poz, because there are no quotes to end that sentence!
Bills Fan888 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I love how you guys blame Jauron for something a player says.
vincec Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 If we had Poz and Kiawaka on the outside LB positions and got a big/tough MLB in draft I would be ok with next year at this position. Keith could be a backup/4th LB in case of injuries as we are undersized here I think right now. Poz is too small and seems injury prone yet seems real fast and could do the OLB position as he is goo din coverage. Agree.
vincec Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I love how you guys blame Jauron for something a player says. I'm pretty sure that Jauron caused my hard drive to crash last week after the Cleveland Fiasco.
Lori Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 It kinda does, but if he truly still said the vast majority was on their two run plays, then no, it sounds just as dumb. I couldn't tell if that was actually added by the writer or Poz, because there are no quotes to end that sentence! Copy-editing 101: When a quote continues into the following paragraph, no closing quotation mark is used at the end of the first one. Everything from "We won the game, but ..." to the end of the excerpt is Posluszny's direct quote. I might also note that while Chuck told him the total, PP may not have known the yardage of Jones' two long runs. (I'm assuming Chuck's the one who told him, because he always makes sure he has any significant stats before he leaves the press box. That's a habit I've tried to learn from him, the few times we've covered the same game.)
Lv-Bills Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Copy-editing 101: When a quote continues into the following paragraph, no closing quotation mark is used at the end of the first one. Everything from "We won the game, but ..." to the end of the excerpt is Posluszny's direct quote. I might also note that while Chuck told him the total, PP may not have known the yardage of Jones' two long runs. (I'm assuming Chuck's the one who told him, because he always makes sure he has any significant stats before he leaves the press box. That's a habit I've tried to learn from him, the few times we've covered the same game.) I hear ya on the copy editing 101 thing, but then why would the following paragraph start with quotation marks again? Doesn't seem to make sense. Nonetheless, I understand now.
Lv-Bills Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I love how you guys blame Jauron for something a player says. I do because that's the typical excuse type crap that is usually fed to players from your typical "player friendly" coaches. Typical indicator. It's funny how Sirius radio was reporting on their training camp previews that, by far, the Bills and the Redskins had the least intense camps out there. Go figure.....Jim Zorn and Dick Jauron. Poz should have just said, they got their arses shoved down their throats and it needs fixed in a hurry. How do you think Ray Lewis would have handled that question?
Lori Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 I hear ya on the copy editing 101 thing, but then why would the following paragraph start with quotation marks again? Doesn't seem to make sense. Nonetheless, I understand now. Essentially reminding the reader that the quote continues, and obviating the need for repetitive attribution. (In English, not having to type "'blah blah blah,' he said" for every paragraph of a long quote.) And I don't think Poz was trying to softpedal anything, or blow it off as "oh well, other than those two plays ..." Go back to his first reaction to the number 318: "We won the game, but we've got to correct that. We can't continue to do that and expect to win games." He didn't mention the two long runs until after that. JMO.
MarkAF43 Posted October 19, 2009 Posted October 19, 2009 Essentially reminding the reader that the quote continues, and obviating the need for repetitive attribution. (In English, not having to type "'blah blah blah,' he said" for every paragraph of a long quote.) And I don't think Poz was trying to softpedal anything, or blow it off as "oh well, other than those two plays ..." Go back to his first reaction to the number 318: "We won the game, but we've got to correct that. We can't continue to do that and expect to win games." He didn't mention the two long runs until after that. JMO. Come on Lori, stop it with the facts..... People have an agenda and you are killing it!
Recommended Posts