The Red King
-
Posts
2,441 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by The Red King
-
-
3 minutes ago, billspro said:
We beat the Falcons and Chiefs.
We went 3-1 against the AFC West which was considered the best division going into the season and 2-2 against the NFC South which was the best division in the league last year.
Typical uneducated reporting.
They were talking about the Chargers, not the Bills. The hub-bub comes in them saying the Chargers didn't beat any playoff teams, even listing the Bills as a win, suggesting they forgot the Bills were actually a Wild Card team.
-
1
-
-
The epitome of the phrase "Consider the source.", I suppose.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, grb said:
There's something so very Billsy about saying Cleveland gives Taylor the chance to start for an honest-to-god real NFL team.......
So...a team that went 0-16 is an honest-to-god real NFL team, while a team that went 9-7 with a playoff birth isn't? Am I misreading something here?
The trade is good for both teams and TT. Tyrod had no faith in Buffalo's receivers, refusing to throw deep even when his receivers did get open, and refusing to throw into anything resembling cover. That confidence wasn't going to magically reappear this offseason. Had Tyrod stayed, we'd see the exact same frustrating ultra-conservative play this season. Going to Cleveland gives Tyrod a new group of receivers. Hopefully ones he can have faith in, which will allow him to loosen up and throw deep again. Note, I'm saying different receivers, not better ones. I think our receivers are better then Tyrod gave them credit for. But warranted or not...TT had no faith in them, he wasn't going to do any better if we kept him.
-
2 hours ago, eball said:
And really, there's the rub. I chalk it up to an all-too-common phenomenon on these message boards that we actually see in play on the US political stage as well. Nobody is willing to compromise any more. It's either black or white. Us or them. No middle ground. I don't understand it, I don't like it, and I don't know where it came from. You can actually like some things about a player and not like others. You can be optimistic without being blind to legitimate concerns. You can have concerns without blindly trashing everything.
Sad, really. I'm glad I don't think that way.
I'll take this one step further. With people polarized, some people here get real upset if you don't see TT the same way they do. I've said I think he's baseline, he doesn't make big plays to win, and doesn't make big mistakes to lose. He elevates teams below .500 and drags teams above .500 down. In my opinion, the Bills finally outgrew him, and the 1-31 Browns are a perfect fit for him.
I have said that, and been attacked from it on both sides. TT supporters blast me for having the audacity to see him as middle-ground and not an amazing QB saddled with the Bills coaching and players...and TT detractors blast me for suggesting he's anything more then useless. It's that absolute factor I think that annoys a lot of people. People aren't flexible. And it's that attitude that makes things worse. Fanatical TT supporters and detractors frustrate the rest of us who just want the season to start so at least one of the two groups might shut up based on TT's play.
-
2
-
-
17 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:
Yup, points matter way more than yards. But to repeat yet again the obvious, points given up matter a lot but they refer back to the whole team. Not just the defense. The whole team. Whereas yards given up do a great job of isolating the defense as the responsible party. How many points are charged against the defense if Tyrod throws an INT and it's run back for a TD? Or if Tyrod ... um ... does his Tyrod thing and throws INTs at a much lower rate than other QBs, who gets the credit for that if you only look at points given up? Yup, great job, Tyrod ... uh, I mean great job defense.
So call it wonderful all you want, but you're calling the whole team wonderful, not just the defense. The offense and STs share a lot of the credit if they consistently put the other team in bad field position by not turning the ball over, etc.
The stat that isolates the defense tells the real story. Yards given up. Which again is that looking at those 13 games alone the defense gave up yards at a rate that would have put them at 20th in the league. That of course meant that the offense was given relatively poor field position and started drives at a disadvantage.
We're not gonna see eye to eye here. We have drastically different views on bend-but-don't-break defenses. The real story is, the defense played well enough most games to give the offense a chance to win. They went into Jacksonville and told the offense, "You put 10 points up, all game, and we're going to OT. Put up 11...we'll win." I'd take that in a heartbeat. Yards per game is not a statistic in a bubble as you claim. How often was the Buffalo D out there? How many three and outs by the Buffalo O? Buffalo's poor offensive play contributed to defensive fatigue, and as such directly impacted yards surrendered. Sorry, there is no one statistic that tells the whole story, isolated from any other factor. The Bills' defense regularly kept the team in the game far later then it had any right to. I see that as having played wonderfully, given how woeful the offense was. You obviously disagree, but there is no isolated statistic that will prove either of us right, so we'll each have to hold to our opinion on the matter.
-
7 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:
No, they did not play wonderfully.
And when a guy trying to pump up the achievements of the defense has to resort to talking about how well they played in the first half of two games, you can hear the sound of spin, spin at hypersonic speed. I don't care what the scores are at halftime. I care what they are at the end of the game. Whether the other team scores more in the first half or the second doesn't make the defense worse or better.
And yeah, though you made a mistake and we scored a bit more than 16.7 points, actually, our points allowed statistic was pretty good in those thirteen games. But scoring is a better measure of the whole team than it is of the defense. Which is why when they say some team is the #1 defense they aren't talking about scoring. They're talking about yards. Scoring is maybe 70% defense. It's also about field position, number of drives faced, and a bunch of other things which offense and STs weigh heavily into. Not to mention that some scores don't come against the defense.
You want to measure the defense you look at yards they gave up. Outside of those three games, the Bills defense gave up 341.5 yards per game. Would've been 20th in the league. Decent. Very very far from great or wonderful.
And that came in 13 games against offenses that averaged 19.07th ranked in the league, a ranking significantly below average.
...you know another signifigantly below average offense? Buffalo's.
You're right, yards given up is a far more meaningful stat then points. When time runs out, points are just a guideline. Buffalo did not lose the playoff game because the Jags scored seven more points then the Bills, the Bills lost because they only gained 263 yards, when the Jags gained...230. Wait, this can't be right. We got more yards then the Jags...but somehow lost? Yet you insist yards gained/surrendered is a far more important stat then points. What a strange paradox. We got robbed! Buffalo won that playoff game! The NFL screwed up and looked at points, not yards!
...oh...no...wait...I suppose points actually do matter a lot more then yards. ?
Buffalo held the Jags to 10 points in their own stadium...the same Jags that put up 45 on Pitt and 20 on NE on the road the following two weeks. I'd call that wonderful.
-
Just now, Doc said:
Because no one holds them accountable.
It's not about accuracy, it's about clicks/views. Best example is the ESPN Power Rankings. Every week there are one or two WTF positionings, not because they believe the teams should be there. Rather so that people will be outraged and load up that 'Comments' section.
-
2
-
-
-
I think Benjamin, really. He's had a chance to heal, and there was zero chemistry with Tyrod. I was at the Saints game, and it was like night and day when Peterman was throwing to him. Regardless of our starting QB, I just have a hunch Benjamin's going to surprise people...including the OP, since he wasn't even on the list. ?
-
2 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:
"The other thirteen they did wonderfully"?
That's a real overstatement, "wonderfully."
Yeah, except for those three games they were pretty decent, better than most people have given them credit for. "Great"? Nah.
Is it? Points surrendered...the three terrible games bolded. Keep in mind the defense did this even given the number of 3-and-outs we had. That was one tired D that could have thrown the towel in, but didn't.
vs. Jets: 12, Panthers: 9, Broncos: 16, Falcons: 17, Bengals: 20, Bucs: 27, Raiders: 14, Jets: 34, Saints: 47, Chargers: 54, Chiefs: 10, Pats: 23, Colts: 7, Dolphins: 16, Pats: 37, Dolphins: 16, Jags: 10
Aside from that three game collapse, the D gave up an average of 16.7 points a game, despite being stranded out on the field by our ineffective offense. First Pats game was 9-3 at halftime, second was 13-13. Those three games aside, you don't think that defense played wonderfully?
-
Oh, to be clear, while I still predict 9-7, I openly admit there can be regression and do not attack/insult people who suggest there might be (people who say there will is another story...I hate opinion states as fact). I fully respect people that put them around six wins even if I don't agree with them. Two wins, while technically possible, is just silly (and if they win two or less games I'll openly admit I was wrong). Buffalo plays Miami and the Jets twice, and those two game alone are normally worth 2-3 wins. So, the argument is either Buffalo will win two against those two teams, and fail to beat any other team...or Buffalo won't even win two of four against those two. Now, I realize the Jets drafting a rookie QB automatically makes them a much-improved, better then Buffalo team by default (wait, did I forget /sarcasm tag?), but still...
-
1
-
-
Click-bait idiocy. This year's "The Bills season is over before it started."
Seriously, did a Buffalo Bill pee in this guy's cereal or something at some point? ?
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:
...have your dog take you for a long walk to calm you down.......rarefied air on that high horse of yours is having an adverse cerebral affect...good Lord........
You took a shot at me, as if using common football terms were akin to using quantum physics. So I simplified it. No high horse here. Good lord, indeed. *shrugs*
-
1
-
-
47 minutes ago, OldTimeAFLGuy said:
...AND at the end of the day, take the square root of your kid's birthday, multiply by your weight, divide by your license plate number, times the length of your dog's tail and somehow the result was....PLAYOFFS.....go figure......well beyond my pay grade............
...heaven forbid I use something confusing like common football terms to explain. Lemmie try again...
Our QB will throw the brown thing deep this season. That means the people in football uniforms that don't match Buffalo will have to play further back. That means less of them at the line of scrim...sorry...that line the ball stars on each play...and that means less people right on top of the runn...sorry...the Bills player that carries the ball. This will make it easier to run.
Better? I can draw a picture if it will help, but I hope this is good enough. No square roots or dog's tails.
-
5 hours ago, SoTier said:
Actually, Blake Bortles played pretty well most of the year, so your statement is dead wrong. Moreover, why do you think that the Bills will be able to run the ball? They weren't nearly as good running the ball last season as they were the season before, and they've lost their 3 top OLers. They've added only 1 veteran lineman, and the prospects of finding decent OLers off the waiver wire are between slim and none. There's also no guarantee that the QBing will be an improvement over last year, either.
FTR, the Bills didn't have a "great" defense last season.
Look at points surrendered. There was a horrific three-game stretch, the other thirteen they did wonderfully. They held the Jags to ten points in their own stadium. They kept the Bills in both NE games for a full three quarters when the offense did absolutely zilch. Nine points surrendered in a loss to Carolina, another playoff team. You still want to claim it wasn't a great defense?
Shifting gears to the run game. Yes, the running game had hiccups. That's to be expected when your QB refuses to throw deep allowing the defense to stack everyone in the box like a poker player pushing his chips all-in. Regardless which QB plays this year, they should at least stretch the field, forcing opposing defenses to play more honestly, giving our running backs something other then a brick wall to run into every down.
-
Still appreciate what they did, and will continue to pull for them until they get in our way. ?
-
Rodak said the Bills' season was over before it started last year and has yet to eat a feather. There will be no crow, as there is no accountability.
-
It seems like an easy enough job if all the other media outlets are an example. Predict Buffalo to go 4-12, mention trading Tyrod as a positive, yet penalize the team. Question Allen no matter what he does...exaggerate the negative, question the positive. Generate click-bait by simulating contraversy and rile up fans.
...that about covers it, right? XD
-
2
-
-
Utterly absurd.
The Bills went 9-7 last year with a new head coach. They went 9-7 thanks to the strong play of their defense. They leaned hard on the D and prayed the O put up enough points to win. That defense has a year under their belt in this system and personnel changes have only made the unit stronger. The crutch the team leaned on is all the stronger, yet we're somehow going to drop from 9 wins to 2? Defense alone will win us at least four games this season, if not more.
I know the offense has people nervous and doubting, but let's be honest, the offense wasn't our strong suit anyway last season.
-
1
-
-
Regarding Gronk, a soldier can still kill a man with a combat knife or his bare hands, should someone knock the gun out of his hands. I still like my chances a lot better if the soldier doesn't have the gun. Saying the Pats can still win without Gronk is akin to saying a soldier can kill without a gun. Yes, technically true, but a hell of a lot harder to pull off.
-
Let's get daring...
1) Edmunds is DROY.
2) AJM is the starting QB unless injured or the Bills are eliminated from playoff contention, at which point Allen will step in.
3) The Bills win one of two games against the Patriots.
-
1
-
-
Help is there, he had the opportunity to take it, and instead mocked the idea (and one person offering help) publically on Twitter. So, I see both sides. I can give him a bit of a pass based on mental illness, but can still fault him for rejecting the help so many offered.
-
Still the same owner, still the same coach. Really, nothing more any of us can say to sway the others at this point. We all have opinions, time will tell who is right. Regardless, this will be a fun thread to revisit halfway into the season. I hold to my earlier prediction. Cleveland wins six, Buffalo wins nine.
-
Nothing new here. D is improved...offense, that comes down to QB, the ultimate ?. I don't think we downgraded. I think AJ will at least be on par with TT. But that's the crux. I don't know for sure, nobody does. Your opinion on past and current QBs make all the difference here. Personally, I see an improved D and an offense at least on-par with last year, and younger faces to boot...so I see a better team. But that's my opinion, nothing more.
Tyrod Taylor: I still feel that I’d done more than enough to stay
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
...and this is why talking to Tyrod supporters vexes me. What I said cast TT in the best light possible. Game film showed that he had receivers open deep a nunber of plays and he never pulled the trigger. That's not speculation, watch The 22, or hell, even just the game broadcasts. So, the question is...why didn't he throw? I chalk it up to lack of confidence in the receiver corp. I even made it clear that lack of confidence might be justified, even if in my opinion it wasn't.
So, you tell me...game film showed TT had receivers open deep that he just didn't throw to. Now, let's go with your claim that it wasn't lack of confidence in the receivers. Now, that means there was a number of plays TT has receivers that he trusted open deep...and didn't throw. Why? Now...the remaining answers look less charitable for Tyrod...as they are all indicitive of flaws in him...not seeing the open receiver, not being decisive enough to be able to commit to the pass...not trusting himself to throw accurately (remember, you said he trusted his receivers). So...if he trusted his receivers, as you claim...why did he still refuse to throw to them when they got open?
I swear, some Tyrod supporters really don't think things through, content to lash out at any anti-TT sentiment without actually considering what was said...