.jpg.64f04b1fec4d04b87f4fd01082e72eb6.jpg)
Kelly the Dog
-
Posts
40,269 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Kelly the Dog
-
-
We don't need Terrell Buckley. It does a team no good to have a guy make plays, and have that same guy make just as many bonehead plays that lose games. That play lost the game for us. If it makes it we win. No other play or player was like that. It wasn't a tough play, it wasn't a superstar play, it wasn't a clutch, come up big play, it was an easy, simple, seventh grade play.
-
In football, like in all professions, and in all places, there are 100 different kinds of personalities. Some guys can control their emotions completely and some cannot. We are asking these guys to turn their adrenaline on and off over and over and over, and absolutely demand that they go 100.00 per cent insane on every play. Some guys need to motivate themselves this way. Fletcher and Spikes seem to be that way. Some guys just like the spotlight. Nate seems to be that way. Some guys are just able to flick it on and off. We are asking a lot of a human being to take another human's head off every single play at top speed and then ask them to please play nice and "act like you have been there." Some are capable, some are not. TKO and Fletcher dont seem to hurt anything with their displays.
-
It wouldnt be so bad if they added a Milk Bar some place where we could go for a drink.
-
the real point is on 3 and 11.... running the ball, why not let Drew go to the EZ? You get catch, a flag or a sack. To add insult to injury we then took a delay of game penalty to give the punter more room. This cowardly, play not to lose approach stinks. what a lame guy we have running things.
He was trying to run a little clock and get 5-7 yards to make the FG attemptable, but they played it well. The delay of game was to get every second out of them and give Moorman a little more room to pooch the kick and try to down it deep. Both were good calls, IMO.
-
You're lucky you only had two of them. I had to sit in an entire SECTION of assclowns. It was, like, 330 or something.
-
Several if not most of his tackles were short passes of very little significance completed against him where he was right on the man after the catch and knocked him OB or straight down. That one tackle on the Wire whiff did indeed save a score, however. TV had a very solid first game for the Bills.
IMO, it's impossible to imagine that Nate didn't know it was fourth down. In the huddle I can't believe TV or Spikes or Sam Adams or Fletcher or someone wasn't screaming "We need to make one play!"
-
Hey Kelly. Its a rule similar to the Down by Contact ruling from the KC Denver game last night. Once the official calls a player down by contact or forced out by a defender, then that call is not reviewable. The Officials were only able to check if he maintained possession as he hit the ground. The Competition Committee meets every year to review things like this and decides how to correct it, but Only if enough coaches and owners complain.
It's not that I don't believe you, because I do. You seem to know a lot about this kind of stuff. But there is a clear and obvious reason why certain calls are not reviewable, like the whistle element of the player down by contact rule. I simply don't see any logical reason that a player ruled to be forced out, when found out to be NOT forced out without question (which is the only way they would overturn something anyway in theory), could not be overturned as an incomplete pass. After all, force outs are by nature and definition the end of the play.
Granted, this would rarely happen. Because there is clear contact made on 99.9% of force out calls. And I can imagine why the league wouldn't want the officials debating whether or not a judgment call like a force out should be overturned. Like if he only hit a little, or may have still gone OB because of the angle that he jumped rather than the push by the defender. But if there was a clear mistake by the ref (which there wasnt here) and the contact that forced the receiver out was, say, his own teammate rather than an opponent, I would think they would (or should) be able to overturn that.
-
The announcers blew it as usual. Usually tasker is right on, but he blew this one. The replay was called because they wanted to make sure he maintained possession during the fall to the ground. They COULD NOT overturn the pushed out, or feet inbounds, but if the ball wobbled or came loose as he hit the ground then it is NO CATCH! That was what they were looking for and it was inconclusive. That is what the Referee said, so thats what we live with.
Why could they not review the feet inbounds if they determined no one forced him out?
-
Don't think they won't go down the field this year. Or that there werent plays called to go deep. Or that there werent plays for this week designed to go deep that they didnt use. The difference is, this staff uses a versatile strategy. The way this game was played didnt force us to go deep. The defense was holding the Jags to very few yards. Leftwich was off. We were consistently moving the ball. The JAX free safety was playing way back on all three WR sets and when Evans was split wide. There were a lot of factors in this particular game that didnt prevent but certainly led the Bills to come up with this game plan. And it should have worked.
Granted, I, too, would have liked them to air it out to Evans just to let the kid run and see what happens, but the defense against them as they lined up didnt really allow it. It would have been stupid just to do it with two guys looking for it.
It was just the way this game played out that we didnt go down the field a lot. It is not as though we took it out of the playbook.
-
Could you cut that twelve-step program down to like, a five, or three step? I mean, it is Drew you know. A statue and all. He has been taught to get off those programs quicker.
-
But they don't know if he was down. He thought he was. The ref blew the whistle before the player started getting up. Players would get rocked from behind unwitting if refs started doing that I think.
-
Yeah. Theisman, as usual, was so wrong. When the play is ruled dead the ref blows his whistle. You cannot take that back. When players hear the whistle they stop (or they're supposed to). You cannot go back under any circumstances and give possession or yardage to one team or another after the whistle has blown.
-
You are totally right (
) Mick, I saw the play. It still worked, blown coverage or not!My point is that while I DO want the team to play a sane, non-Gilbride offense, I do NOT want them to foresake downfield throws. We have Moulds who can go deep, and Evans with his blinding speed.
MM is a rookie. He will learn, imo.
I said this in other posts and other ways but a ) I guarantee you they called a bomb to Evans once and Drew (wisely) audibled out of it, and b ) they had Evans covered deep all game long. The safety was way, way back looking for that. All the time. I agree we should go downfield, and we will. But you do that to prevent the safety from sneaking up like they did last year, but the safety was not sneaking up.
-
You and I spoke about this after the game, but as I was thinking later, since the upstairs booth was responsible for calling for the review, doesn't that automatically imply or mean it was reviewable? I would think so.
My opinion, as I said, is still that they ruled the Bills forced him out of bounds. The first time I saw it I thought that Reese hit him pretty good, or at least enough to knock him OB. On another angle, it looked like Reese barely even touched him, and didnt really change his direction. That is what I think they were looking at, did Reese indeed force him out by contact (in this case, ANY contact) and did he have possession and get his feet in bounds if Reese in fact, did NOT force him out.
By the ref's description of the review, they looked at both of them. And they decided that yes, Reese's contact forced the OB and the player had demonstrated possession on the catch. I still think if they saw that Reese never touched him, they would have reversed it. But that is just my opinion.
-
Let's not forget if Clements doesn't go after the ball earlier in the game and get the pick we most likley not had the lead at the point in the game either. oYu can't have it two ways, everyone I am sure applauds Nate for his INT in the first half that lead to the Moulds TD but will then dump on him for doing the same thing later in the game. Now there's no telling for sure what Winfield would have done if he were in that situation but I have a feeling that Winfield would have been behind Smith and then just try to wrap him up with a tackle.
I know people will point to Winfield's two fumble recoveries yesterday but look at the play by play. The Vikings were up by 11 and 18 in the 4th Quarter which definately helps Winfield's situation where Clements was in a close game where any mistake will be greatly magnified (as seen by this posts and others).
I stand by that Clements is far and away a better CB then Winfield because he is a playmaker.
Clements made TWO incredibly selfish plays in that game that directly led to 10 Houston points. He showboated and didnt make a simple tackle on a short completion that ended up a long score and worse, he tried to punch the ball out with a few seconds to go on his man that he was right behind and let him gain about 25 more yards that became a long FG. he personally lost that game for us more than any other player. Both times he was in perfect position to make the play, and then chose to do the punk-ass thing and not the fundamental thing. He has million dollar athletic gifts and a two-cent selfish head.
-
Normally yes. But when they are not stacking the safeties and are already playing them back, it is not quite as necessary. Jax didnt do a lot of that even though we didnt go downfield.
If you watch the tape, there is one play in particular that I would bet anyone anything they were going deep to Evans. They set it up for him to be the only one wide, and it was a good time to do it. But as sson as he went over there the deep safety followed him. He was being double covered and Moulds not. Drew changed the play at the line to a run to Henry I think. But you could see Drew notice the safety way way back watching Evans and he wouldnt have been able to complete the pass.
-
I agree. I thought the D was excellent. But it is also true that they need to make plays to WIN games and not lose them. We are close to being a very good team. The good teams win these type games, but they also snowball. If guys like Nate or Reese make a play to win a game like this instead of lose it, it goes a long way to turning the tide.
-
Evans had a BIG affect on the game. They always had a man deep with him. That safety deep last year was a safety at the LOS almost every play. That safety often blitzed and often stopped the run. Moulds was open and single covered a lot because of Evans yesterday. I was absolutely astounded that they played their safety so deep, always to Evans side. I don't recall more than a couple plays that they didnt do this. He already has had an affect in a positive way on the offense without making catches. Although he made a nice first down catch and also made a whale of a play on the fumble recovery. He can block, too.
-
This is a team which has been in desperate need of difference-makers for awhile. Clements has successfully been ONE of those people from time to time, but in my view the lack of having enough difference-makers so he immaturely tries to play that role all the time, and the lack of a convergence between difference-makers and leadership has made for his showboating.
One difference between the Bills of the early 90s and this crew is that the old-guard had multiple difference-makers and multiple leaders. Individual players had the capability to step up from time to time as first it was Thurman, then Bruce, then Kelly, then Talley, etcetera etcetera stepping up and sharing the load. We simply do not have that.
We would not be so worried about Clements show-boating if Reese, Wire or Spikes had bloacked that final pass. We would not be so worried about Clements if Henry or WM had bulldozed the ball in to give us a lead. We would not be so worried about Clements if Villaril had not been caught for holding.
Clements got beat )and beat bad) by a better play by Smith yesterday. However, he also got an INT which set up Moulds TD. He is going to be a mixed bag just as past Bills CBs were (Nate Odomes for example). Focusing on him as the problem is fine because he is far from perfect, but failing to focus first on the real problem that there simply are not enough players on the Bills being difference makers is the real issue and the path to getting better.
I really have to disagree with that. Clements didnt get beat by a better play by a good player, Clements just went for an interception when his SOLE RESPONSIBILITY was to knock the ball down. That is IT. Even if he made an incredible diving one handed stab THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN A BAD PLAY. It was 44 yards down the field. He could have made a great catch and we'd still lose 30 yards. That play was made because he is a hot dog. And it flat lost the game. There isn't even an argument about that.
-
One minor action that had a big impact was Fletcher's dumb move of kicking the ball after the Jimmy Smith catch, which resulted in a penalty which stopped the clock. If he didn't do that, at least 10 seconds would have come off the clock as the players lined up, and the Jags would have had at least 2 less plays at the end. A dumb move by a veteran.
That was totally stupid, and gave them five unnecessary yards. But I don't think it had the affect on the game clock the way you stated because if I am not mistaken, the Jags still had an extra time-out they didnt use.
-
That was one of a number of plays that could be singled out as THE key play. There's no excuse, of course, but I see all the time where a DB succumbs to the temptation of going for the interception when batting the ball down is actually more beneficial to the team. I think it might help if whoever is calling the defence on the field gives a reminder to everyone not to go for the int, just bat it down.
This isn't in the same category as a "key" play. In 99% of the key plays in a game, it has a great affect on the outcome but one cannot say for sure that the win/loss would have been different. On the Clements play, the game was OVER. The Bills could have just fallen on the ball. He was in position to just make the simple play the way a shortstop in little league would think to himself just before the pitch, if the ball is hit to me, my play is to second base. It is a fundamental play that every single coach in the history of football would tell his team. On fourth and long, KNOCK IT DOWN. DO NOT TRY FOR AN INT. KNOCK IT DOWN.
-
1. This game was lost, IMO, by one guy and one play because of one reason: Ego. If Nate Clements didnt want his name in the paper for an INT, the Bills win. You learn that in seventh grade. There are not a lot of plays in a game where it is a definite that if a play is made different the outcome is different. In this game there were two, the last play TD and the 4th down play. Nate is a jerk, and he cost us a win. That was unconscionable.
2. Anyone that blames this game anywhere close to Drew didnt see it. He played well. He didn't ty to force anything, he was very accurate, he stepped up in the pocket, he threw the ball away a couple times. He had nine total incompletions and Campbell dropped two, Shaw one, Neufeld one, and perhaps another. That fumble was all on Moulds (along with the design of the play that shouldnt have been backwards, there was no reason for it).
3. The offensive line was pretty good. Not great, but for the first game together with all the injuries and new faces and question marks, they held up well. The Villarial penalty, however, was obviously a killer. I didnt see it so I don't know if it was blatant, or if his hold allowed Willis to get the first down. Did they show a replay on it?
4. Seaking of Willis, he is getting his speed back slowly but surely. His stats may not reflect it but he accelerated better than I had seen him in pre-season. He is powerful and a very smart runner. He really could be a great one. I thought they should have used him more on third downs and in the backfield with Henry more.
5. Schobel made some very nice plays in the run game but didnt do much at all as a rusher. The defense, overall, was very much as advertised, except for Nate the Hot Dog. I was surprised that Gray had PP playing the fourth corner in dime packages instead of K. Thomas. I am not sure if that is a permanent thing.
6. For those who thought that the Bills should have gone deep, or that Evans wasn't a factor, you probably werent at the game. Almost every time Evans was wide, which was a lot, there was a safety WAY back, probably out of the TV screen view. I was shocked at how much cred they gave to his speed.
7. I think that if Lindell had made the 41 yarder, than MM would have chose to kick the 51 yarder. But at that point I had zero confidence in my kicker, too, and I though the punt there was the right call. This was also a Jax team, whose QB had struggled the whole game, against a defense that had given up two FGs, with one of the best punters in the game. That was a tough call, and I understand both sides, but I would have done what MM did under those precise circumstances.
8. The play-calling was fair to pretty good for me. The early reverse was totally unnecessary. You need to set that up a little more. There were a couple of very nicely designed plays, especially the reverse screen to Willis with TH in the backfield. The play-action at the one was not a bad call. There is ZERO, I repeat, ZERO problem with passing on 3rd and one or 3rd and two or three, the problem exists when you ALWAYS do it, or, say, like 56 times in a row. Those who say you should always run there are as big a stubborn bastard as Killdrive.
9. I didnt see the purpose of having Shelton in on third downs, which he was a few times. He didnt and doesnt do much for me, also I will have to watch the game on the tape to know for sure. campbell could be a real factor if he would hold onto the ball.
10. Nate Clements stinks. His coolguyitis outweighs his play-making at this point.
-
-
Elway was, of course, not drafted by the team he led to the Super Bowl, like Dilfer.
danny's
in Topics
Posted
Yeah, what she said.