offsides#76FredSmerlas
-
Posts
526 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by offsides#76FredSmerlas
-
-
Exactly.
+1
-
I keep hearing everyone talk about how bad our offensive line is when I don't think it's the case at all. The Bills have been doing a very good job even though they have had to patchwork the line for several of the games this season. I think we found some up and comers in Wrotto and Urbick. There have been only 4 other QB's sacked less than Fitz that have thrown over 300 balls. Our #1 RB is averaging 4.3 a carry. I think Fitzpatrick has a lot to do with the line looking so good, along with an upgrade in coaching but let's give the line some credit and stop bashing them for things that went on before this season.
-
I can't stand listening to Tasker. What the hell was he trying to say about "being smoothe as water". The only guy worse than Tasker is Joe Theisman.
-
I'm not sure what all the hype is about. He is doing a good job as a coordinator just as he did in Buffalo. We have seen far to often though that just because you are a good coordinator that doesn't make you a good head coach. We do remember Greg Williams amongst others. If he is lucky enough to get a head job as he does well then I could see why some Buffalo fans might scratch their heads and say, "what if?" I'm happy with Gailey because I don't think our record shows the progress we are making as a team. We have done a lot of house cleaning and it's going to continue. I believe better days are ahead.
-
-
Why are you comparing plays from a period of time where the force out rules were the exact opposite to what they are today?
This is not complicated at all:
1. 2010 force out rule means a player is out of bounds when forced out by any kind of legal contact from another player. Does not matter what kind of contact that is as long as its legal.
2. A player is NOT down until he establishes that in a legal fashion.
3. Touching a downed player while not down yourself does not establish yourself down. A players contact with the ground establishes a person down.
4. Play was ruled out of bounds initially and refs need conclusive proof to over turn it.
5. There was no conclusive proof as only the front of his elbow is visible to be in, but its exactly at the out of bounds line and you can not see if any part of his body is out of bounds or not.
6. Under replay rules, this play should not be over turned.
7. Refs did miss the PI call, but they missed it on CORNER as he used both arms to push off Boldin in the endzone to gain an advantageous position to even make the INT. How do you think Boldin hooked his arm in the first place? Because Corner had it in his chest as he was positioning to make the INT.
Summary: Bills did not get screwed on this play...should have honestly been a PI call on Corner, when it wasnt called and he made the great INT with one arm, it was incoclusive to whether or not he was in bounds and they could not over turn it.
Time to move on...it was a fun game, the offense and Fitz gave it one heck of an effort, its something to build on, but the Bills lost because the Bills beat themseles with 4 very costly turnovers against a more talented team. Its pretty hard to beat a team with so much more talent than you when you have 4 turnovers, all of which they scored points on.
This doesnt even make sense...a rule change because of a fluke play that affected a winless team?
First off, there was already a rule change that made this play possible. How does everyone keep over looking this point? The only rule that could have saved this play was the force out rule that existed up to last year.
I am the original poster and I moved on a long time ago. The Bills are bad and my only hope is that we can improve and get some additions for a better 2012 team. The reason I posted is not because I am crying over spilt milk. I just wanted someone that has more knowledge than I do to explain the out of bounds rule to me and I wanted to see if anyone had a better view of the elbow coming down because I don't own a DVR and can't freeze frame.
-
As I said in one of the other threads about the non-INT
Another point that has been lost in all of this is the "Dead Patriot Laying Out of Bounds Thus Negating Recovery of Fumbles by Bills Rule" ... if Boldin is touching the white line in any way, while touching Corner (before Corner has established possession), then Corner is ruled out of bounds. I haven't gone back to look at the play, but by my recollection that is definitely a possibility.
It doesn't matter if Corner's elbow came down in bounds ... he was on top of Boldin whose back was touching the white stripe ... Corner is thus ruled out of bounds
Thanks for that breakdown; never thought of that...
-
You're right, his right elbow did come in contact with the turf, but I couldn't tell if he was in bounds or not. The angle looked like it was in bounds, but I got to agree with the refs, there was no absolute proof he made contact.
Do the officials see the same replays we do at home or do they have other angles to look at?
-
Did anyone else happen to see Reggie Corners elbow on his called back interception in the endzone? Reggie made a nice grab with a Balltimore receiver draped all over his arm, but his right foot clearly did not hit the turf but rather the baltimore player when it came down. The interesting thing that I watched was his right elbow. It looked to me like his left foot came down in bounds and then his right elbow. Did anyone else witness this because the commentators just focussed on the right foot and never mentioned the elbow? I'd like to know if anyone at home froze that up on their DVR and got a better look. I know it can't do anything for us now but I just thought it was interesting take on the play.
-
What a dumb post-seriously!
-
People you have to understand that until we start getting some quality players in the draft and/or a stud QB no good Free Agents will want to even come here. We haven't been to the playoffs in over 11 years and we don't have a QB worth a damn. Who in their right mind would come to Buffalo? Guys like Cornell Green and Torver who are not players high on any other teams list. Believe me, Buffalo wants better FA's and Ralph IMO is not cheap. But until players around the NFL see that were building something here or have a QB in place we will be the last team any of them would choose to play for.
-
He had 13.5 in 1986 (down from the "record" 22 in '85), the first year the Jets employed the 3-4, but his numbers dropped off the face of the earth after that (he did have a string of injury problems, though). It's pretty difficult to figure out exactly what effect the 3-4 had on these guys because without the benefit of gamefilm it's virtually unknowable what defensive set they were in when they accrued sacks. We know, without a doubt, however, that Bruce Smith spent the vast majority of his career in a base 3-4 D. Certainly, some of his sacks came in 4 man fronts in Nickel, Dime, and Quarter packages--- but to spend 15 seasons primarily as a base 3-4 DE it's absolutely amazing that he was able to consistently beat double and triple teams and penetrate into the backfield, not only to sack the QB but also chase down RBs behind the line of scrimmage. I think a strong argument can be made that Bruce is the most dominant defensive player in the history of pro football.
Thurman#1---- if you're as interested in sacks and statistics as I am then maybe you've read about the work of John Turney, a fan who has spent countless hours studying play by play sheets and gamefilm in an attempt to (as accurately as possible) determine the correct pre-1982 NFL sack figures. His work is widely quoted by sports writers, although he himself admits that the numbers he came up with cannot truly be considered official due to the inconsistent nature of record keeping over the years--- though it's a good gauge for what might have been.
His revamped "All-Time Sack" list still has Bruce at #1, though guys like Deacon Jones (who famously asked: "Since when does 'all-time' begin in 1982?") played most or all of their career in 14 game schedules.
TURNEY SACK LIST
Rk. Player Sacks
1. Bruce Smith 200
2. Reggie White 198
3. Deacon Jones 173½
4. Kevin Greene 160
5. Jack Youngblood 151½
6. Chris Doleman 150½
7. Alan Page 148½
8. Lawrence Taylor 142
9. Michael Strahan 141½
10. Richard Dent 137½
10. John Randle 137½
12. Rickey Jackson 136
13. Carl Eller 133
14. Leslie O'Neal 132½
15. Coy Bacon 130
It's interesting that names like Coy Bacon and "Bubba" Baker are all but forgotten because sacks were not kept as official statistics during the 1970s. The great 1964 Buffalo Bills' defense, for instance (incidentally the 1st pro team to employ a 3-4) are unofficially credited with 50 QB sacks (in only 14 games).
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=weinreb/081006
Turney's season by season breakdown of sack leaders from 1961-81:
1961 Gene Lipscomb 17.5 or 18 (not 100% sure, still checking it out, it's either one or the other)
1962 Jim Katcacage 16
1963 Jim katcavage 20
1964 Deacon Jones 22
1965 Deacon Jones 18
1966 George Andrie 18.5
1967 Deacon Jones 21
1968 Deacon Jones 22
1969 Steve Delong 15.5
1970 Tony Cline 17.5
1971 Cedric Hardman 18
1972 Jack Gregory 18.5
1973 Bill Stanfill 18.5
1974 Jack Youngblood 15, Dryer 15
1975 John Dutton 17
1976 Coy Bacon 21.5 (small issue of scoring may be 22)
1977 Harvery Martin 20
1978 Bubba Baker 23
1979 Jack Youngbood 18
1980 Gary Johnson 17.5 (Baker had 17, there was a game where a could half-sacks went as full sacks)
1981 Joe Klecko 20.5
Punch & Thurman I usually am not astounded by what to many people on the chat board say but you have really made me think about this idea and now I have to admit that Bruce was even more dominant than I gave him credit for. I always thought Bruce was a terd as an individual and I have several reasons why but as a player he was no doubt a beast. To go off what you wrote about Deacon Jones and him playing 14 games. OJ Simpson never gets credit for running 2,000 yards in 14 games which I think is remarkable. They just put him in the catagory of the 2,000 runners, but try doing it 14 games. When the NFL goes to an 18 game season it's really going to screw the record books up.
-
This is one of my favorite points in regards to how great Bruce truly was--- Leonard Marshall had some terrific sack totals for the Giants after they converted to a primarily 3-4 front (including 15.5 in 1985 and 12 in 1986), but he was surrounded by Hall of Fame linebackers. When Lawrence Taylor is lining up to your immediate right you're bound to benefit from the lack of available blockers get to the QB.
But that was an all-time great defense in the era where the every down 3-4 was just coming into it's own and certainly a rarity nonetheless. Bruce did it for 15 years, regardless of the changing personnel accompanying him.
(Although, after thinking it over for a few minutes more, Neil Smith of the Kansas City Chiefs comes to mind, who had a dominant stretch in the early to mid '90s, although he also benefited from lining up next to a Hall of Fame ROLB in Derrick Thomas and the Chiefs sort of ran a hybrid 3-4/4-3 at times.)
Mark Gastineau had a couple of solid seasons in the 3-4 but most of his career was spent in a 4-3.
-
Bingo! The senator has the floor. Good GM's make the moves BEFORE the season starts! Evaluate, make cuts make, additions and go with it. This is not a well run team. Period.
I guess those guy running the Patriots have no idea what their doing...
-
I suppose New England has no clue on what their doing either by getting rid of a top 3 WR in the league for a 3rd round pick. The bottom line is some value is better than no value. Jackson and Spiller had little value to the Bills but now that Lynch is gone they bring a lot of value. You have to look at the big picture and not be narrow minded. A 4th rounder is better than Lynch riding the bench because in actuality he is not our #1 back, Jackson is, and also he wasn't going to get more carries than Spiller who they are trying to get more touches. Lynch was showcased for 3 games so they could get rid of him.Look, it's just dumb. Spin it however you want. You take a guy that's probably going to be a top ten RB with just about any other team in the league and you trade him for a number four? This ownership and staff is simply out of it. Most top-tier NCAA teams are not run this badly.
"Oh, we'll package that number four and get a number three out of it." What crap!! This will go down as one of the worst deals in Bills history. It will make a great combo with what will likely be one of the worst seasons in Bills history.
I dont care if Johnny U and Jim Brown came to this team in their prime. They would stink. There is no O-line (and no desire to win) and therefore no offense and no winning. Rock bottom? Yeah, we're very close. I cant believe that the line for the JAX game is the Bills +1.5. My god, get ready to make a LOT of money. The Bills will be blown out. They are the WORST team in the NFL with no debate possible. Pay your mortgage and put it all on JAX. This one wont be close either.
-
He always was the #1 guy; not Lynch. They were just showcasing Lynch so they could send him packing. Nobody gets rid of their #1 running back.
-
Hmmmm, you must work in the Bills front office and had inside information. How do you know we could have got this same deal? Everyone thinks they know when the Bills could have made a better or equal move. The fans have no idea what the compensation was they could have got. Stop listening to the media; their wrong about 80% of the time.
Lynch is a step away from getting in to some major trouble with the NFL. I'm betting he won't go 3 years without another arrest or drug suspension. He also was a marked man on this team when he didn't show up for so-called voluntary workouts. He didn't want to be here and I'm glad they dumped his butt. Jackson is the better back anyways. Lynch got showcased for 3 games so they could get him out of Buffalo.
-
while I don't object to the trade, I find it highly questionable because the Bills could have made this trade pre-draft with Seattle who wanted him at that time and gotten the same pick this year. Considering all the holes on this team a real RT would have been nice
Hmmmm, you must work in the Bills front office and had inside information. How do you know we could have got this same deal? Everyone thinks they know when the Bills could have made a better or equal move. The fans have no idea what the compensation was they could have got. Stop listening to the media; their wrong about 80% of the time.
-
If Andrew Luck isn't coming out to this draft, I'm all for drafting a LT and then going after Andrew Luck the year after to solidify a line for him to play with. I think Andrew Luck is worth the wait.
When is the last time Buffalo had the #1 pick overall two years in a row?
-
Nothing else should matter for the bills right now except building a offensive line. One step at a time. the better u run the ball the better your qb and wrs will be. Then focus on d
The Bills need a QB, o-lineman, d-lineman, at least 3 linebackers, a wide out, and a safety. The Bills need to find a franchise QB and they haven't been able to do that the last several years going 7-9. Because our record will be worthy of a top 3 pick most likely we must gamble and yes drafting is a major crapshoot on a QB who will stick around for the next 10 seasons. After they select a QB, and they will select a QB, then they should load up on picking the best lineman they can find on both sides of the ball. The other positions cannot take priority over the QB and lineman. I am tired of poor QB play and I am tired of losing the war inside the trenches and just getting pushed around.
-
One thing I'm tired of seeing is running by committee. If we're only going to run nine times in a game, they should all be to one guy. I choose Jackson
+1
I'm tired of seeing Marshawn Lynch smiling and laughing on the sidelines with his teamates in the 4th quarter of a blow out. I doubt Gailey was cutting up and laughing with the other coaches during the game. Why is it okay for certain players; because they don't care and their not hurt by what's been transpiring on the field.
-
No, it is the scheme, the coaching and yes, the lack of talent, but they are all intertwined equally on an NFL team. Come on now. You don't think that Bill Cowher and the assistant coaches he would have hired, would not be getting more out of these guys?? In another thread, I complain about the coaches "old boys" network of hiring assistant coaches. Well, that is not quite altogether accurate, as some posters pointed out to me. Every head coach wants to hire assistants he worked with in the past. However, I'm quite sure that when Cowher comes back to an NFL team, (if he does), the coaches he worked with in the past, especially the men he hires as his OC and DC, will be people he's worked with before in some capacity. But I would be that his OC and DC he brings in, will have been coordinators in the NFL before. And that makes a huge difference, especially on a young team like the Bills, who also lack pro bowl level talent. If Gailey would have looked around the NFL and chosen a real OC and a DC with experience, I am sure this team would not be as miserably bad as they are right now. They were nowhere near this bad this time last year, and I think those coaches sucked pretty bad themselves!
So of course these new schemes and coaching is having an effect on this team. Unfortunately, it has effectively helped to make them worse then last year.
Chan Galiey was Bill Cowhers OC and Bill liked him so much that he endorsed him to be the Bills coach. The bottom line is we need the horses to win and right now we are lacking players big time.
-
What would you call him? The Bills list him as a LB. NFL.com, an OLB.
The point is that it's totally stupid to even consider comparing Witherspoon to Kelsay.
The other thing that people don't understand is it's not about why we don't bring in this player or that player---"Players do not want to come here". Do you think that just because you want someone that means they come to your team. Think about it would you go to the Titans or the Bills, hmmmm that's a no brainer!
-
We should invite him back and offer to pay him for what he can be which is: the best pass rusher /linebacker /defensive lineman on our team (even out of shape)!
He needs to just retire and we need to start playing our younger guys. Why would we bring back an average defensive lineman who would have to shift to linebacker; a brand new position in which he never played before? And for what 1 year??? Besides Schobel would never come back to an 0-3 team.
Grading Chan the Man
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
I 100% disagree with you. You can't make free agents play for you. When you are losing and don't have a QB for over 10 years no player worth a damn will ever come to your team because they don't want to be stuck with a loser. If you land a few key players when drafting, especially a QB and free agents see there is something to build around "some promise" then they might come. Buffalo spends money bud, quit with that dumb line already. When Buffalo had Kelly they had no problem picking up other studs in free agency like Paup and Loften. We have been doing a horrendous job drafting and that has led to a terrible decade of football. That's the #1 reason why we don't have good free agents and why it looks like we don't spend money.
Let me back that up by saying that we probably have a good chance to finally get some higher level free agents next year because the team does look like it's on the upswing and Fitz is playing well. If I'm a player on the outside looking in I might want to be one of the missing pieces that can bring an up and coming team to the playoffs.