mjt328
-
Posts
3,116 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by mjt328
-
-
This is what I mean with Hackett.
Great call, catching them off guard with Summers.
Then he wastes 1st down doing it again.
-
Over and Over and Over !!! Is it the front 4 ?? or is this on the linebackers ??
Looks like poor tackling from everyone.
-
That's on Pettine. I noticed this last week against the Bengals.
The Bills Defense doesn't even seem to be in position to make a play. Three WRs on the right side of the line. We have two CBs, a safety back about 10-15 yards, and nobody.
Impossible to stop that play.
-
Aaron Williams had a monster game against Boring Joe Flacco a few weeks ago. After said game, he returned to form, getting burned too often and not making any plays. What is his role in this defense? Are we supposed to pretend he can be just like Byrd? Byrd was a CB converted to safety as well, but Byrd looked good for more than one game in his first year. I don't think Williams will be even close to Byrd and Byrd isn't even that good. Leonhard is a more consistent playmaker, and Searcy, while young and mistake prone, has actually had more than 1 good game in his career. And while it is unlikely Byrd stays here, if he did, Aaron Williams would be a ST player only.
So, we should've jettisoned the guy. Called up any team, I don't care if it was the Pats or the Jets, and unloaded him for a hopeful 2nd round pick or, more likely, a 4th rounder. I hope that the FO did shop him, but I'll never know. If they were not shopping him, they made a mistake. SImple as that.
He's played well as a safety.
He's played terrible as a cornerback. Even the Baltimore game he got burned by Torrey Smith on a deep pass.
The plan is to keep him at safety once our other corners are healthy. Probably as a backup to Byrd at free safety or starting over Searcy at the strong spot.
If Byrd is traded or let go in the offseason, he will probably be our starting free safety. If not, he is still great depth.
-
It's funny. The team goes 6-10 for a decade, but when you suggest one of the incumbents might not be doing his job consistently, it's like blaspheme or something.
Kyle Williams is O.K. He makes a play here and there. I can't defend the guy, or anyone on that D, when they give up 400-500 yards a game and keep losing. Also, held up against the Jets DTs, ours pale in comparison.
But defend away people. He's awesome.
Isn't consistency everything in being a professional football player? If you painted houses and half of them looked good, does that work?
The Bills sucking as a team doesn't mean Kyle Williams does. He's got 10 other players on the field playing defense. He can't make plays for them. Not to mention the coaching staff. He's not the only "constant" over the last several years. We've also had crappy linebackers since Takeo Spikes and London Fletcher left town.
The guy plays DT. That's a non-glamorous position. He isn't going to rack up a lot of tackles or sacks.
Focus on Kyle Williams during games. He's probably our most consistent player on defense. He commands a lot of double teams. You rarely see him getting pushed backwards or pancaked. He's often pushing into the backfield. At worst, he's caught in a stalemate with his blocker.
If he's shooting his gap and/or occupying two o-linemen, and the running back still gets a nice gain on the defense - it's probably the guys behind him that aren't doing their job.
Consistency is everything in being a great professional football player. Never said Dareus is great. Just not ready to label him a mistake.
I think Dareus is a solid player. The mistake was taking him over players like AJ Green and JJ Watt.
-
From my vantage point, Kyle Williams is not the problem. Not to say he never gets beat, but he's certainly not the biggest cause for lapses in the running game.
On most plays, Kyle Williams is responsible for one of the "A" Gaps (between the center and the guard). Probably 99 percent of the time, he's the first guy off the ball and filling that gap. Many times he is also facing a double team.
The majority of big runs against us are through one of the "B" Gaps (between the guard and tackle) - usually be handled by an ILB or SS ... or an outside run where one of our players fails to keep contain - usually a DE or OLB. I haven't noticed too many big runs right up the gut.
In my opinion, our run defense is significantly better than last season - even if it doesn't show on all of the stat sheets yet. I think a lot of that improvement is due to Kiko Alonso being a massive upgrade over Kelvin Sheppard at MLB. He's quick and always around the ball. Still, I've seen Alonso caught over-pursuing and out of position quite a few times. As he gets experience, I think the big runs will come less and less often.
I also think it would be smart to find an upgrade over Arthur Moats/Nigel Bradham in the offseason.
-
Rational thought is a fancy form of making excuses. Super Bowl wins are all that matters. The better man is determined by W's. Fitz was a better QB than Brady for a fleeting moment, cause he won. Period. The other 20 guys on the field are irrelevant. Football is QB vs. QB. End. Of. Discussion. Period. That is all.
Yes. I agree that Super Bowl wins are all that matters in the end. As a Bills fan, I would rather my team have a Lombardi trophy in the case, instead of several players in the Hall of Fame and/or record books.
But that wasn't the original poster's question. He asked about using Super Bowl wins to compare players (specifically QBs).
The legacy of Jim Kelly, Thurman Thomas, Andre Reed, Bruce Smith, Marvy Levy, etc., etc. would ALL be looked at completely different if Scott Norwood's kick went through the uprights. Despite the fact they had NOTHING to do with that individual play. Good or No-Good.
Like someone else said, John Elway was in the same boat as Jim Kelly and Dan Marino - until the last 2 years of his career. What if Denver hadn't gotten lucky and landed Terrell Davis in the final rounds of the draft? What if Elway decided to retire a few years earlier?
-
No, it isn't. And it's not just a problem for QBs.
I make this argument every time the HOF voting comes up. The guys with the championship rings are always pushed up the list. Guys without rings are left at a significant disadvantage, unless their stats are completely out of this world (like Dan Marino or Barry Sanders).
Case in point. Michael Irvin, Andre Reed and Tim Brown were all top WRs in the same era. All three dominated on the field. All three had great stats. All three had Pro Bowls. But only one of them was a first-ballot selection. The others may NEVER get in.
-
Here are the times this year that each NFL team is forced to play an opponent off a bye week:
Three Games =
Buffalo, Carolina
Two Games =
Houston, San Diego, Chicago, Arizona
One Game =
NY Jets, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Tennessee, Denver, Oakland, Dallas, Washington, NY Giants, Philadelphia, Detroit, Green Bay, Atlanta, Tampa Bay, New Orleans, St. Louis
None =
New England, Miami, Baltimore, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Minnesota, Seattle, San Francisco
-
I've noticed this trend as well since back in Week 1. I'm surprised we are only #5.
We blanked Zach Sudfeld in Week 1. Kellen Winslow and Dallas Clark were putting up good numbers until we played him in Week 3. Jordan Cameron was putting up Pro Bowl numbers until Week 4. The Bengals have two good tight ends in Jermaine Gresham and Tyler Eifert. Neither did much on Sunday.
Greg Olsen scored a touchdown in Week 2, but didn't dominate. He was about the only TE that did anything against us this year.
Anybody with All-22? I'm curious who has been handling the majority of coverage on tight ends. Alonso? Moats? Searcy? Williams?
-
I love how this staff isn't afraid to dump crappy players when they continue to suck week after week (first Shaun Powell and now Colin Brown). There are literally hundreds of free agents sitting at home. You might as well give someone a chance. It's unlikely anyone could play worse than Brown was through 6 games. He doesn't need to be on our roster. Period.
Not every street free agent is worthless. Brian Moorman was unemployed. In one game, he proved that he's a much better option than Powell.
For way too long, the Bills have been content to keep mediocre talents in starting positions and terrible players sitting on the bench. Once a guy proves he doesn't have what it takes, cut them. A real front office should be doing everything in their power to roster the best 52 players possible.
I have a feeling that Justin Rogers isn't far behind once we get some players like Stephon Gilmore and Ron Brooks healthy.
-
He hit a couple nice deep throws, which kept us in the game. But he held the ball waaaaay too long and was very indecisive. Defensive coordinators will pick up on that.
-
There are really good arguments for either choice (as you can see above).
Personally, I would have gone for it. As Marrone said, the odds of picking up ONE YARD and taking the lead are in the Bills favor. If we somehow failed, there was a good chance we could make a quick stop and get great field position right back.
I've never been one to shy away from criticizing our coaching staff when they make a mistake. This was not one of those times. You cannot judge a coaching decision based purely on the end result. It is their job to put the team in the best position to succeed. It's on the players to execute. With that said... Did Hackett put the Bills in the best position to succeed with his play calling at the goal line? That's another story...
-
The refs were atrocious again.
They killed a Saints drive by calling a false start when it was CLEARLY offsides on New England. The Patriots also got a free 3 points because they refs didn't let Brees call timeout, and he threw an interception in the confusion.
I've watched 4 of 6 games for the Patriots, and the refs have been heavily lopsided in all of them.
-
There are still quite a few missing pieces. But another good draft and some development by our younger players would really be huge for this team. These are what I see as the biggest problem areas:
Quarterback:
This has been the biggest hole for the last decade. Through 6 games, we still aren't getting a consistent, high level of play out of our QB. Hopefully, Manuel becomes that guy soon. At this point, it's way too early to tell. He's shown some good signs, but also some troubling ones. If he develops into a top guy, this team becomes a playoff contender instantly. If he bombs though, the rest of the team really doesn't matter.
Offensive Play-Calling:
Hackett has gotten a lot of criticism so far, and for good reason. Regardless of the talent level and inexperience he's working with, his play calling has been predictable and unimaginative. The complete opposite of Pettine.
Cornerbacks;
Assuming Manuel is our long-term guy, CB is easily our biggest weak spot. Every team should have 5-6 capable corners. We have 2-3, when everyone is healthy.
Pass Rush:
I really like the guys on our defensive line, but they are just too inconsistent. They were nowhere to be found yesterday. They were nowhere to be found against the Jets. We could really use another strong pass rusher on the edge.
Play Maker in the Passing Game:
We have a couple great route runners (Stevie and Woods). We have deep speed (Goodwin and Graham). We have good pass catching backs and a tall red-zone threat (Chandler). What I don't see is great YAC ability. I like the idea of adding an explosive tight end -- somebody like Chandler, but with moves and speed to do something after getting the ball.
Offensive Line:
This group was SOOOOO close to being set. Then we let Levitre walk. Left guard is a big problem area. Pears has been inconsistent (it would have been nice to see what Hairston could do this year).
Linebacker:
Alonso has been great in the middle. Lawson has been very good on the outside. We could still use an upgrade over Moats/Bradham.
-
Hackett's main problem is that he does not always understand the rhythm of the game. There is a time to run and a time to pass. You don't run 3 consecutive run plays and pass on 4th and 8. There are so many times that he runs the ball like a pop warner offense. All game, all the time and straight up the gut. Where are the screen plays and play action passes on 1st down? Defensive Coordinators study habits. When do we ever throw the ball on 1st or 2nd down? He is a fairly predictable coordinator. I will say this though, he seems to be improving. I think that he is slowly learning to adapt to the NFL level and becoming better. He is so close, he just has to mix up his packages more. We have talent on this team and we have been in every game. I cannot wait for this team to get over the hump. Almost there... GO BILLS!!!
Bingo.
Play Calling is mostly about keeping the defense off balance, emphasizing the strengths of your offensive players, and attacking the weakness of your opponent. As he mentioned, there is a "rhythm" involved in calling the right plays at the right time.
In the Baltimore game, there was a sequence where we busted off a couple nice runs. Then bam... play action bomb to Woods. Touchdown. Perfect.
That was an example of great play calling. Where was it today? We were running the ball down their throats in the 1st quarter. It was ripe for some play action. Did we even call it once?
Hackett doesn't seem to understand rhythm. He is way too predictable. He doesn't seem to know BASIC counters against the defensive schemes he's facing. Jay Gruden saw an agressive defense and Gilmore with a cast. So he dialed up a heavy screen game and absolutely toasted us.
-
Marrone is fine, but Hackett is clearly a problem.
The guy simply does not understand how to attack defenses.
-
Very interesting that Brooks and Rogers are both inactive, but Gilmore is not. I can't see any way he doesn't play today, and (unless he's a bit rusty) that may be HUGE for today's game.
-
Absolutely not true. Look at Brady's history in his Super Bowl games. Almost entirely short-medium passes.
Even in recent years his game is short-medium.
He reads Ds well. That's what's needed. In fact, the longer the throws, the less the time of possession. A short and medium passing game is so much more important.
Exactly right.
The most successful Super Bowl winning quarterbacks over the last 20-30 years - Tom Brady, Joe Montana - did the majority of their damage with short/underneath throws.
-
1. Quarterback
The key is consistency. It's not necessarily about having Peyton Manning, Tom Brady or Drew Brees. It's about having a QB that can play at a very high level, week after week - against every kind of defense thrown at him. He needs to play well against heavy blitzing teams AND against those that play heavy coverage looks. He needs to make throws against man to man AND against zone. He should be able to hit the deep throws frequently, but also have the patience to pick down the field with underneath throws.
2. Coaching Staff
The key here is adaptability. Look around the NFL and you see tons of copycats. West Coast Offense. Tampa 2 Defense. Read-Option. Wildcat. Spread. A good coaching staff doesn't form "his system" and force it on the players. He adjusts his scheme to fit the players strengths and hide weaknesses. He adjusts the weekly game plan to attack that particular opponent. Every team in the NFL has talent. But only a few coaching staffs know how to maximize what they've got week after week.
3. Supporting Cast
This is different from team to team. It's about knowing and building on your franchise's identity.
If you are the Denver Broncos with a QB like Peyton Manning, it's more important to have an excellent O-Line than a shut down defense. Why? Because your championship hopes depend on Manning staying healthy. And if the defense can just keep the opponent under 25-30 points each week, the Broncos win 90 percent of the time. On the opposite end, a team like 49ers (when they had Alex Smith) needed a strong running game, and a defense capable of keeping the opponent under 15-20 points each week. Because Smith was better suited as a game manager, not a guy who could win in a shootout.
-
I'll never understand why teams even consider trading proven players for draft picks. It's a stupid gamble that almost never works out.
The point of the draft is to select a college prospect that you HOPE becomes a good player. Why would you trade a good player for the CHANCE you get something decent in return.
Over the last few years, we've traded Willis McGahee, Marshawn Lynch, Lee Evans and Jason Peters for draft picks. On every single trade, we ended up on the short end of the stick.
The closest we got to a good deal was in the Peters deal - since we ended up with a pretty good player in the draft (Eric Wood). Despite the grudge that most Bills fans hold against Peters, they must admit that Wood is nowhere near the player Peters has been (3x Pro Bowler and 2x All-Pro since leaving Buffalo). When healthy, Wood is probably a Top 10-15 center in the NFL. When healthy, Peters is probably a Top 5 left tackle.
And it's not just us. What did Denver get in return for Jay Cutler? What did the Oakland Raiders get in return for Randy Moss? Do you think Dee Millner will make Jets fans forget Darrelle Revis? Please.
20 years ago, the Dallas Cowboys fleeced the Minnesota Vikings for Herschel Walker. Now everyone thinks draft picks are gold. It's ridiculous.
exactly. First rounder or nothing! Then draft Lee from USC.
Let's assume that Buffalo can get a high 1st round pick for Stevie Johnson (not in a million years). They can select Marquise Lee, Sammy Watkins or another top WR.
What are the chances Lee/Watkins eventually turn out as good as Stevie Johnson, 2-3 years down the road? 50 percent? 25 percent? 10 percent?
In the best case scenario (a high 1st rounder), we would still be taking a huge gamble. Stupid.
-
Absolutely not. Draft picks are ridiculously overrated.
Pretend we get a 1st round pick for Stevie, which is more than any team would give up for him.
First of all, we create a BIG hole at WR. Our #1 receiver becomes Robert Woods. Our #2 becomes TJ Graham.
WR becomes a big need. So instead of improving at OG, TE, LB, CB or another position - we now have to use our pick on an unknown player.
Even if we use that Number #1 pick on another WR, what are the chances that we get a player of Stevie Johnson's caliber? The guy has 3 straight 1,000 yard seasons and is widely considered one of the best route runners in the league. More than half of 1st round picks in this league are complete busts. Another 25 percent only turn out to be decent starters.
Instead, why don't we use our #2 pick from next year and offer it to Cleveland for Josh Gordon. That way we are absolutely loaded at the WR position for years to come.
-
If he is playing better than EJ and we are winning games with a chance at the playoffs - then NO DOUBT you definitely leave in Thad Lewis.
Re-open the QB competition in next year's training camp.
It's fun to think about, but I seriously doubt this will happen. I went back and looked at the 4th preseason game and watched his throws. His accuracy is dreadful.
-
Great job to get momentum in the second half.
This would be a great job to hit them with a play-action deep pass.
Official 1st Half Thread - Bills and Fins
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Should have called timeout.