AKC

I'd say there's a mounting body of evidence that suggests this should read: "during their run the Pat's OLine scheme proved exceptional at picking up the blitz" What I saw Sunday was more of what I have seen when Brady isn't getting the best protection in the league- poorly thrown balls being dug literally out of the turf by the best hands WR corps in the league. We frankly applied some pressure, hardly equal to what half the QBs in the league face every Sunday, and Brady needed to be bailed out of his skittish perfomance by the exceptional work done by his receivers on multiple plays.

Along with the internal tacking by each team of missed tackles (data you won't see released), STATs and I believe TwoMinute Warning track MTs also. In the segment on our LBs after week 2 (6 Days to Sunday?) on the NFL Network you could see that it was a stat used by our guys for an independent "fine" pool. Crowell could go broke before the end of the season ;-)

Sorry for posting a redundant thread Hammer- just caught this string-

We're right on the cusp of conflicting goals between the fan base and the management team. Surely for the Head Coach and his primary people there is only a win now motive since a 6 win season will almost surely spell "changes". Our management has left us a shell of a roster in comparison with the top 1/3rd of the league and they are also feeling the pressure to win now. I'd think it would be the fan base, unless ownership jumps onboard, providing the push to give Losman the QB reps. The lesson Losman was supposed to be learning (sit in the pocket under all circumstances and let plays develop) has been absorbed to whatever degree you can get it from the pine; it's probably time to say get back in there and play some games. But I expect Mularkey to feel he has a better chance of winning more games with Holcomb.

Here's a link to ESPN, send them a note of appreciation for the quality work they did Sunday as I have below: Tell ESPN What A Great Job We're Doing! Your Broadcast last night of the Pats/Bills game is without doubt the single worst effort by any network since I began watching football on television in 1964. The incessant coverage of Teddy Bruschi, a linebacker getting knocked senseless all over the field for the full duration of a tight game, verged on hysterical. Clearly your staff went into the evening hoping to find some intrigue into a game you incorrectly assumed would not be interesting, but in the end the one thing that proved of very little interest was the non-story you over-pursued. You might learn something from the sport you're covering by forcing an adjustment during a game when your preparation shows to be so seriously flawed, even if that adjustment is to send someone into the booth to shove a sock down Joe Theisman's throat so a majority of the viewing public are able to suspend the "Mute" feature that is a normal pre-requisite for any Sunday Night Football broadcast.

I agree Moulds earned the flag- on the other play the network offered us just one angle but even on that it appeared very clear to me that the ball visibly moved when he hit the playing surface. I can't believe there wasn't any other look at that play with it being ESPN's one big viewership shot each week.

I'm hardly one to make excuses for Lindell's wet noodle of a leg at critical junctures, but that field was inexcusable in a league that has removed the weather factor from its premier event. If New England can't support a stadium without allowing every soccer league, polo club and Shriner tryout to mess up the playing surface, perhaps their team should be among those mentioned for a possible move to L.A.

I'd hardly start with the defensive play calling on a night when our glaring weakness looked to me to be our awful tackling. The coaches can design 'em and the players can make the calls, but in the end someone has to tie up the opponent. On too many occasions when we could have smothered the little bit of life the pathetic Pats showed last night we instead allowed them to hang around close enough to have a chance to win if we faltered.

Oddly, I can't seem to locate the stat the ESPN built their whole game strategy upon- "Plays Participated In". I've checked with the league, STATS and Elias and yet no one seems to be able to tell where ESPN came up with it.

Hear-Hear! In the contemporary NFL DT has become arguably the most important position in the game, and the depth mix you have rostered up there determines your ability to play 60 minutes on Sundays. We came into the season with half an NFL DT depth chart and we'll pay for it through the rest of this year. Let's just hoep there are a few inspired Sundays where the guys left playing the middle of our D can hold up long enough to allow some of management's prized toys to give the bulk of the fan base something to look forward to next year.

After much lobbying by my buddy Johnny "The Burro", as of next week you'll be able to order up a full draw of Labatt's Blue at Barney's Beanery.

I'll go along with the "ploy" strategy since he's on pace for 2.1 INTs, the lowest in his career and hardly the type of number the biggest CB contracts are awarded for. Playing in a declining D can also decrease the free market value of a cornerback. At this point it appears his value int he offseason will have dropped by a substantial margin and the idea of a one-year contract could very well be the leverage the team wants to actually negotiate a new long-term deal with him under these circumstances. I'd like to know something about his agent- is he the same Todd France who kicked for Philly a couple games this year?

5 Feet seems slightly generous- I can tell you that of the maybe 6 times I've been out on the trestle when the train was approaching NOTHING about "waiting it out" on that little walkway sounded like a good idea!

A trip to Letchworth is incomplete without a walk out onto the trestle, only to be chased off by the whistle of an oncoming train. That south entrance also takes you out to a great little bar in Portageville- you go left off 19A to the 436 and there are two places there, it's the further bar in town but the name escapes me right now. It's actually the old bar in the downstairs of a hotel and it's a classic old building.

The one thing Belichick has become consistent in since his embarrasing firing as a head coach in Cleveland is to bring out his defense every week focused on taking away the strong suit of his opponent. And while it can be argued that Buffalo hardly has a strong suit on offense, the reality is the ONLY danger to the Pats Sunday is our running game. Our current coaching staff has shown the propensity to allow opposing defensive schemes to dictate how we play on our side of the ball, and what I'm expecting is that every possible enticement will be used to draw the Bills into passing the football. On yet another Sunday of the 2005 season it's likely that we'll be throwing more than running the ball, a recipe that so far this season has attracted few appetites- unless we consider those of our opponents. At the same time Mularkey has proven that he's in love with gimmick football. To see JP Losman finding some duty on the field Sunday shouldn't surprise Bill's fans since Mularkey would probably consider it confusing to the Pats. Some might argue it would be most confusing to our QBs. We've opened games well, if you can consider the first drive the "opening" of the game. That's something else that won't miss the keen eye of one Bill Belichick. Back in NE their D is probably being fed a pretty steady diet of our initial drives this season in the hopes their D makes our first drive the major priority of the day- kill off the strength of your enemy and your enemy will most easily succumb. Watching our first drive Sunday night should tell us much about the week of prep and which staff got into their players heads more effectively.

We could have used your "expertise" over the weekend. I'm guessing nothing at McAfee would have been missed

I wonder if it's this easy: We both agree the run D sucks this year, and we agree the pass D on 3rd downs is poor. Where we differ is in whether the overall decline of the defense has been caused by the field position given up on the first two downs or just poor execution of our pass defense.

The trench is for an honorable cause- I'm putting a "waterless" urinal in the corner of the garage and draining it down to a lower property. Since I have a full bar in the basement entered through a door in the garage it will provide a convenient spot to avoid accidents just like Big Bob's. And LA- that's not mud on those kness, it's blood. That should change your line of inquiry ;-)

Sadly the D Cup will be held at Clancy's Bar until the next match between the Bills and Raiders. The golf course is our only sanctuary, but by a much smaller margin than our opponents on the football field managed.

You were near Chile's favorite "excavation" area- I can only conclude the "quicksand" you're referring to is something you should get out of your shoe treads right away.

I'd think a strength of schedule debate between the two seasons would be tough to support considering last year the AFC East was far stronger and we weren't being manhandled by teams like the Saints and Raiders. If you're trying to say the defense of last year was overrated I won't argue against it- but was it substantially better then this one? Boy Howdy! I don't want to discourage your conversation about third downs especially considering the fact is that last season we caved in on 33% of them while this year we're giving up on 45% of them. Yes we're bad on third downs- but I simply can't disconnect that from the fact of what's happening on the first two downs where we're leaving teams with easier- or shorter- third down attempts. And therein lies my principal complaint about the run defense on first and second. I might be confused by your position- I'm guessing you're not saying the cumulative effect over the course of a game of a 7 yard pass in football is anywhere near that of a 5 yard run?

Among the alcohol soaked bruised and battered egos from the Raider loss, we additionally suffered a couple of material injuries- Apparently that trench I dug behind the garage last week was too inviting for Big Bob come "bedtime" after the game. Luckily his knees saved him from damaging any other body parts. See the link below- As for Kelly The Dog's parking skills, let's just say the tow strap on his vehicle was required BEFORE he had his first adult beverage. This just looked to him like the proper place to "squirrel away" a city vehicle ;-) D Cup Casualties

I don't know who compiles average opponents first/second/etc., so until we can get them entered I'll provide these stats that show just how dramatic that decline is: In 2004 we led the league in lowest average opponent drive when we allowed 22.53 yards per drive. In 2005 we've dropped to 19th in the league. In 2004 our DLine was 3rd in the league giving up an average of 3.73 yards per opponent carry, in 2005 we've fallen to 22nd. In 2004 our opponents gained 10 or more yards on only 15% of their running plays, in 2005 that number has more than doubled to 33%. That means that for every three runs against this '05 DLine our opponents can expect to hit one for over 10 yards! I will speak not from a statistical basis but from an observational one when I say that in 2004 we forced far more long third downs on the average than our current defense does. No stat offered in this string suggests anything to the contrary. The question in play is whether the decline in our defensive front due to the loss of a starting quality run stopper has caused the overall decline of the defense. For my money it's crystal clear- statistically we know that on average we gave our opponents the third worst third down field position in the league in 2004. This year there are only 12 teams doing a WORSE job than our first and second down units. That drop, basically all the short 2nd and 3rd down plays we're allowing, is the single biggest contributor to the Bill's decline on defense in 2005 IMO and further is arguably the single biggest factor in our overall decline. The difference between last year is one man- a run stuffer and a very good one at that- who by his good play on rushing downs forced opposing offenses to face many more third and longs than we're forcing now, and as a result we are giving up far more third down plays because our opponents options are expanded with a regularity of 2nd and short/3rd and short downs.

I've been wondering what they were doing these days at Abu Ghraib since they removed "climate therapy" from our bag of tricks. Falafel?

Then before addressing your other positions is it fair for me to assume that you acknowlege that as a result of the diminished run D in 2005 our opponents are seeing shorter yardage third downs to convert on the average verus they did against the far tougher on first and second down unit of 2004?