dave mcbride
-
Posts
23,159 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by dave mcbride
-
-
Sorry I just don't see it that way (especially your Jax reference). All defenses give up plays or drives here and there. We gave up fewer plays / yards / however you want to measure it .... than 30 other NFL teams. YPP was among the league lowest, Turnovers #1, yards #3, Sacks #3. Even 3rd down % (which does need improvement) was like #13. There was no defense this past season that you could not say the same thing about. This is the NFL and there is another team on the field with talented players and coaches as well. If you think the D in the Steeler game was even equally responsible for the loss with the O, then I'm wasting my time even debating this with you.
i'm sorry, but the d in the steelers game was equally responsible. see my post above. there's no way a team should have been able to run the ball down the bills throat in the fourth with brian st. pierre at qb and a third stringer at rb. come one. this is not to justify the statue's performance or say that the bills d was not a good one, by the way. i just happen to think they're overrated given their performance against good teams the last couple of seasons. they rank above the pats d in most categories, but i'd take the pats D any day over the bills. it's not even close - those guys are money when it really counts.
-
There was a thread a while back that suggested Belichick sold his soul to the devil to turn into the "genius" he is today. I mean this guy was "Hank Bullough-stupid" in Cleveland. The guy couldn't find an NFL-caliber player in the draft if there was a blinking neon arrow pointing at one. And now he is making all the personel decisions! And it's not like he's right 70% or 80%, it's more like 99%!!
It sure makes one scratch their head.
PTR
p.s. keenan mccardell was also a draftee of the browns in the belichick years
-
There was a thread a while back that suggested Belichick sold his soul to the devil to turn into the "genius" he is today. I mean this guy was "Hank Bullough-stupid" in Cleveland. The guy couldn't find an NFL-caliber player in the draft if there was a blinking neon arrow pointing at one. And now he is making all the personel decisions! And it's not like he's right 70% or 80%, it's more like 99%!!
It sure makes one scratch their head.
PTR
[/quotes]
you're wrong, promo - in his prime, everitt was among the best centers in the league (along with d. dawson and stepnoski). langham was awesome for a couple of years as well. and let's not forget the late eric turner, who was the best safety in the league for a couple of seasons.
-
I think the doofus is the guy who wrote the column. Talk about revisionist history!
Belichick spent 5 years as HC of the Cleveland Browns .He took a team that went 3-13 and improved them to 6-10, followed by two 7-9 seasons. In his 4th year he finished 11-5 and won a playoff game before bowing out of the playoffs. The next year, Modell destroyed the team when he announced on 11/6 that he was moving the team to Baltimore. The team was 4-5, 1 game out of 1st place and after the announcement went 1-6 the rest of the way, finishing 5-11. After the season Modell wanted someone with ties to Baltimore & fired BB, hiring ex-Colts (and Bills OC) Ted Marchibroda. The next season, minus the genius the Ravens went 4-12 showing it wasn't Belichick's fault. In addition, after being fired by the Ravens, Belichick rejoined Parcells in NE and helped get NE into the Super Bowl with Drew as QB-quite a feat. He then came to NY with Parcells with the stipulation that he would be HC of the Jets when Parcells stepped down-quite a lofty promise for a "failure". When Belichick wanted to move on to NE, Parcells stepped down & named Belichick HC-NY Jets. Since he didn't want Parcells shopping for his groceries, he resigned & waited out the process until NE gave the Jets a #1 pick in order to get BB to NE. Ever heard of a #1 in exchange for a failure? Neither have I! Belichick was a victim of Modell's move in Cleveland & both the NY Jets & NE Patriots didn't view him as a failure. So BB didn't get along that well with the press, so what! Ever listen to Parcells press conferences when things don't go right-I've never heard a more abraisive, sarcastic press conference than Parcells after a loss & noone ever called him a failure.
also, this doozy:
It's so easy to see things in black and white. For sure, Belichick is a failure-turned-success. But he did both to such extremes that you wonder how many other factors are at work. We're so lost in his success now that we forget about Cleveland.
They remember in Cleveland. Touchdown Tommy Vardell, Steve Everitt, Antonio Langham, Craig Powell. No one else remembers them.
for those who remember, antonio langham and steve everitt were *excellent* players for cleveland for a few years before injuries got to them. in fact, the bills were in hot pursuit of everitt because of hull's retirement and everitt's pro bowl caliber performance but he went to the eagles as a free agent (after which he ended up getting hurt). some reporters are just awful ...
-
bill - i really do think that every position is a priority assuming the player under examination can improve the performance of the team. not to belabor a point, but just look at the pats - in the past four seasons, they've drafted 3 DTs in the first round (warren, wilfork, seymour) and have made relatively big signings (traylor, ted w). they've also drafted 2 tight ends in the first round the last three seasons (watson, graham) along with signing christian fauria.
in my view, if a guy fits the program in a special way, you go after him even if you're decently stocked at the position (see mcgahee, willis).
having said all of this, darren howard for NO is supposed to be an excellent player.
-
Given a choice, I'd take our late '90s defense over the defense we have now. IIRC, the late '90s defense finished 3rd in the league in points allowed; significantly better than our current defense. Moreover, that defense looked like an elite defense against the best teams in the league. It always seemed you could count on them in a pressure situation: you'd want more than anything to put the outcome in the hands of the defense if the game was on the line.
Our present defense is the opposite: it's break but don't bend. It will throw a ton of pressure at you with blitzes. Inferior offenses get overwhelmed; making our defense's stats look good. But the better offenses pick up the blitzes and make us pay. I saw a statistic one time that showed that playoff teams were much more likely to convert a third down when the defense blitzed than when it didn't. The fact that these teams were apparently good at picking up the blitz probably is a reason why they're in the playoffs in the first place. Considering how heavily our present defense relies on blitzing, I can see why it looks a lot better against mediocre offenses than it does against efficient offenses like New England's.
good point - against the pats the first game this year, we blitzed on almost every play (or so it seemed) and brady shredded the d for 300+ yards. granted, vincent had gone down early, but it's not like mcgee didn't play a pretty good game.
-
Oddly enough my least favorites would ahve to be Easterbook and that Simmons guy. Neither one of them seem to have much interest in the actual game (or perhaps know much about it) and instead are more interested in babbling on about their vapid observations regarding bad music and worse television. They are the American Idol of football journalists.
Also a dishonorable mention to Peter King whose columns usually seem to focus on his favorite subject, Peter King.
I like Len Pasquarelli(sp) because he's a decent writer, tells it likes he sees it, seems to have pretty good sources (particularly in Buffalo) and keeps his commentary to football.
My favorite is probably DrZ. Many dislike his often abrasive style but it doesn't elicit much reaction from me aside from the occasional chuckle. He doesn't waste his time or mine writing about personalities, soap-opera storylines or salary nonsense; aside from occasional snippets about wine(which I skip) or old stories(which I love) he sticks to what he's supposed to be sticking to, football. I also like the fact that he often represents the feelings of the real fan (as opposed to the imaginary corporate demographic), giving our knowledge and understanding the credit it deserves while at the same time taking frequent shots at the frequent stupidity of the networks and league offices.
When you consider he's a former player and watches more ball than any other writer (with nobody else even being a close 3rd), it goes without saying that he sees and knows more about whats going on than any other journalist on the planet.
Also an honorable mention to the late, great Ralph Wiley whom I really miss. An old school guy who wasn't just a journalist, but instead was actually a writer. And a good one to boot. We miss ya' Ralph.
Cya
p.s. lenny p gets some good inside stuff, and i like his morning after column in which he gets good insight from anonymous scouts and gms. but honestly, he's a terrible writer -- his prose is beyond purple, and he's never met an overheated metaphor that he didn't like. i actually find him painful to read.
one other guy i liked who passed away - joel buchsbaum. great american weirdo, and he really knew his stuff. in fact, i heard an interview with bobby beatherd once in which he said that with regard to the draft, JB was the only writer who actually knew anything valuable. john butler went to his funeral, by the way.
-
Oddly enough my least favorites would ahve to be Easterbook and that Simmons guy. Neither one of them seem to have much interest in the actual game (or perhaps know much about it) and instead are more interested in babbling on about their vapid observations regarding bad music and worse television. They are the American Idol of football journalists.
Also a dishonorable mention to Peter King whose columns usually seem to focus on his favorite subject, Peter King.
I like Len Pasquarelli(sp) because he's a decent writer, tells it likes he sees it, seems to have pretty good sources (particularly in Buffalo) and keeps his commentary to football.
My favorite is probably DrZ. Many dislike his often abrasive style but it doesn't elicit much reaction from me aside from the occasional chuckle. He doesn't waste his time or mine writing about personalities, soap-opera storylines or salary nonsense; aside from occasional snippets about wine(which I skip) or old stories(which I love) he sticks to what he's supposed to be sticking to, football. I also like the fact that he often represents the feelings of the real fan (as opposed to the imaginary corporate demographic), giving our knowledge and understanding the credit it deserves while at the same time taking frequent shots at the frequent stupidity of the networks and league offices.
When you consider he's a former player and watches more ball than any other writer (with nobody else even being a close 3rd), it goes without saying that he sees and knows more about whats going on than any other journalist on the planet.
Also an honorable mention to the late, great Ralph Wiley whom I really miss. An old school guy who wasn't just a journalist, but instead was actually a writer. And a good one to boot. We miss ya' Ralph.
Cya
simon - read easterbrook's take on the super bowl this week. his analysis of the eagles offense after wilson went down is laughable.
-
Just curious, between all the talking and print journalists that yap about the NFL who is your favourite, and which do you hate.
For me Greg Easterbrook at NFL.com(TMQ) is far and away my favorite. His column today on the Superbowl is great!!!. Really dissects how the Eagles were outcoached . These dude sees things the way I do.
Least Favorite is Salisbury. Typical ESPN, where shouting is valued over sense
dr. z, by far and away. i want to like easterbrook, but often i feel like he's not really watching the game. in this week's column for instance, his take on what the eagles did after dexter reid came in at safety was simply wrong. that happens too often.
-
That's how I interpreted your original post (and didn't need to write a volume on my misinterpretation).
The one upshot though is that Sam really elevated his game after the benching, and was truly dominant. However, your main point is still valid, as Bannan & Edwards showed that they can be solid contributors and should have seen more than spot duty.
BB basically created a college program with the Patriots. All the hoopla of Pats' players playing for each other is bull. Either they buy into BB's system of the team, or they're gone. David Givens got the hint, and responded.
Lawyer Milloy did not get the hint and followed the money. BB miscalculated the reaction, which turned into a speedbump on the way to another SuperBowl.
yep, gerry, adams did play better. however, that steelers game -- in which the front seven simply blew it -- sticks in my craw. the were really the first good team (organization, really) that they had played since the pats, and they couldn't stop them. i'm not saying it's adams fault, of course. but they should have destroyed them given who they were playing. really, just destroyed them. granted, the statue didn't help matters, but still ....
-
Still it is difficult to complain about this as a Bills fan since our own not as good as we want it to be came within not winning one game at home against the reserves of a better team that had alredy locked up its seeding.
You play the schedule you are given and against the playoff records of other teams and that is all you can do. Overall, I think that your cut falls short if its intent were to indict the Bills defense as bad (its not the best but it is pretty good). Or to say the players were bad (the LB corps actuallly is very good, the DB show promise and the DL is pretty good (except against Pitts) at run stopping but it needs to use scheme rather than raw player talent to produce a rush.
If its intent was to contrast our approach with the Pats as far as managing the players demanding to play, i think it also falls short there as the Pats approach was not tell players to shut up and sit, but instead to divert the good aggression of the players wanting to play into unusual usage of D players playing on O and O players playing on D.
i'm not sure of your first point. as for the the second one, please read my post(s) again. i said they were good players and that the defense is pretty good. that said, coaching is huge in the nfl (duh), and i don't think ours measures up in comparison to the other team i looked at (the pats), who is much better at tactical situational management than jerry gray and his staff. that's freakin' obvious, no? moreover, the o and d switcheroos is irrelevant to the point i'm trying to make. i could really care less about that stuff, as these usually aren't relevant beyond 2 snaps a game. Finally, re the Simms "hype", he's hardly the only one who has said this. the recent comments by milloy about pats players buying into team play as opposed to individual accolades is the same thing.
-
Am I the only one here who thought the defense played well enough to win against the Steelers?
They held the Steelers to 16 points on the entire day, forced 3 turnovers, and scored 7 for our offense.
If not for a Bledsoe fumble returned for a TD, a very stupid INT, and a Nate Clements fumble, the defense plays a very good game.
clements made a huge play, but when it came to crunch time, the bills front 7 got their hats handed to them. i mean come on - the season is on the line, a third string RB is toting the ball, and brian st. pierre, who seems to have an arm as strong as my 8 year old daughter's, is the qb. what's the outcome? a 60 yard run by said scrub to set up the field goal for the lead, and then a back breaking drive in which they converted 3 or 4 third downs with said scrubs fronted by a deep and good offensive line. the season was on the line, and they couldn't stop these guys!!! it was all too typical - it happened against dallas late last year, against indy, and against philly. basically, it happens enough that it's not a coincidence.
-
-
I appreciate this thread and the time spent with the post but re: the defense I liken this thinking to searching for a tiny pebble on a beach when you can get your result by simply finding a large rock (IE fix QB and OL). I've stated before that I think any team should be extremely careful before making the Pats into a " model" for their franchise. I really think it's a unique situation that cannot easily be duplicated.
fair enough, and i'd agree if they were, say, an nfc central team. the problem is, i have to watch the bills play them twice a year. that second game this year was one in which the bills were thoroughly dominated, akin to the KC game last year (another sunday night performance, by the way).
-
I think the fault in your argument is that it overstates the case in a number of ways:
1. First it is true that the Bills D did not answer the call against a quality O versus Pittsburgh and was badly beaten in many facets of the game by the Pitts reserves. However, it seems to go a bit far to claim this one real and fatal problem is based in some broad D failing when this same D beats the crap out of weak and moderate NFL teams (including a few playoff level squads like Seattle on the road, the Rams here and NYJ in the second game. The inmates may be running a good but not great squad, but our D is so far from being bad or an asylum it undercuts your argument.
2. The individual players you point too as being problematic are among the best in the league. Spikes certainly deserved the Pro Bowl nod and Adams did too. Fletcher did not get the nod but simply led the team in tackles. As these players show all signs of being productive on the field, your complaints get reduced to wailing about style points. Do these style points impact team output? Possibly, but there is a "let me play" we want athletes to have in terms of their attitude or they don;t seem to be productive as players.
The item which differentiates the Pats and which the Bills under MM seem to be aspiring to is that the players are being asked and are being anxious to play O when they are defensive players like Seymour who has lined up as a blocker or play D when the are O specialists as seen with Troy Brown playing CB. One of the best things about the Bills this year is that MM seemed to respond to Adams wanting to play by inserting him in as a blocker in the red zone offense and their performance was upgraded. Likewise Bannan contributed in the redzone, and even Ryan Denny was used as a TE. MM is a rookie HC and it seems unreasonable to me to expect him to make a major change in the Bills ethic on a dime.
However, the Pats-like answer to Adams demanding to play is not telh him to shut up as you suggest but actually to let him play and prove he can contribute on other units. MM is doing this with good results as best as I can tell.
3. The thinking fan does not go too far in taking the story laid out by the media as the gospel. The Pats are special in that they do seem to pick up for each other as players and not back bite each other as seemed to be the case for example in the RJ/DF dispute and the negative ranting of fans around the Bledsoe case. However, be it Phil Simms or the rest of the media they do seem to gloss over some real life fights and negativity in Patriot land. When BB bollixed the management of the Milloy situation last year, it was quite amazing to me to hear some of the falry public scorn heaped on the genius BB by the Pats players. This had a direct and pretty large impact on their play and they got steamrolled by the Bills in the first game last year.
However, a couple of things happened:
1. BB publicly admitted he had been surprised and mishandled the situation.
2. The Pats suffered a series of grievous injuries to key players like Colvin and were forced to either pack it in or suck up for each other. It is a tribute to the character of the players they chose to suck it up and play for each other.
I think a key to the Pats success has been not that they bend to every whim of the management, but that they always watch each others backs as tammates whether the foe is th media or Belichick.
I'd take a deeper read of the situation if I had your views because they do not seem to spring from the full truth of the situation as best as I can tell.
i won't respond to everything, but i will say this -- i'm not referring to d playing or vice versa. i'm talking about maximizing your use of possibly 12 front seven players on defense and using different combinations to beat your opponent. as for claiming seattle is a good team, give me a break. they would have been 6-10 at best if they had been in the afc central or afc east. same with the rams, who moved the ball pretty easily against the bills in buffalo in any case. as for it not being the full truth, i'm fairly certain my eyes aren't lying. watch some pats games and look what they do against different teams. the bills don't do the same, and it shows. did i ever say the bills defense is bad? no. they're actually pretty good -- good enough to dominate mediocre teams. however, they aren't good enough to play well against the really good teams, and a lot of that has to do with coaching decisions. don't get me wrong - the pats are an *exception*. unfortunately, we have to play them 2 times a year and they've won 3 championships while donohoe has been here. maybe their system is better than ours.
-
-
the bills would have gotten killed. they consistently play poorly against good teams, and generally can't stop them.
-
In the middle of this past season, there was an incident that shows a key difference between the bills and the pats. Sam Adams threw a fit when he was taken out of a game (one that they won). Afterwards, Jerry Gray spoke with Adams and effectively decided to placate him in the future. The consequence? adams played most of the snaps for the remainder of the year. Tied to this, Fletcher, Spikes, etc. persistently and proudly proclaim that they're every down, every game players who should never come off the field. And they don't. Of course, they (and adams) are good players. But let's compare them with the Pats.
Against the Steelers, Ty Warren, Vince Wilfork, and Jarvis Green played virtually the whole game. Roman Phifer was nowhere to be seen (he only played a couple of snaps). Why? Because the Steelers are a running team, and these were the defensive players who could best stop them. Two weeks later, against Philly, Warren played two snaps all game; Wilfork played one (or two - I'm not completely sure). Why? Because Philly is a passing team, and they decided that the best way to stop them was with 2 linemen and 5 linebackers most of the game. The same pattern has been evident for a number of seasons for the Pats. They get great production out of their young players from year one onward, and they expect it from them. It's gotten to the point where when a 5th round draft choice, Dexter Reid, can come in in the middle of the Super Bowl (replacing Eugene Wilson) at safety and play fairly poorly, the word you hear is "he may well not make it - just compare him to Randall Gay, Dan Klecko, Dan Koppen, Brandon Gorin, Jarvis Green. Guys who produced immediately."
Phil Simms earlier this year said that he visits camps and teams all year long and one constant for every team save one is players complaining about not getting enough playing time. The exception? Of course, it's the Pats. He said that it's amazing: the players never complain about not playing enough snaps, and that they understand and like the system as Belichick has set it up.
Let's swing back to the Bills, especially their front seven on defense. What kind of production have we seen since 01, when a bunch of rookies were thrown into the fire because of a dearth of talent? Anderson, Edwards, Bannon, Crowell -- they almost never play. The second rounders at DE obviously get playing time, but even then Kelsay didn't really contribute much at all as a rookie.
The upshot of all of this: when the Bills defense has faced good teams over the past two years, they've almost invariably failed when it comes to crunch time: the Pats in particular, who have sliced and diced the Bills three games running; Indy last year (who had a crushing drive at the end of the game; Philly last year; KC last year; the Jets this year [recall that Pennington tore a shoulder muscle in the first quarter of the second game]; Pitt; etc.). There haven't been many fresh legs or alternative tactics vis a vis the front seven in any of these games. As for the Bills defensive record this year, of course they're one of the better units, but recall that they padded their record this year playing the NFC West and a gift of 15 total yards from a horrible Browns team, but next year won't be so kind. If they're going to take one page out of the Pats book, I would suggest trying to figuring out how to maximize the unique skills of each player (starter and non, young and vet) and applying them in the appropriate situation. Tied to this, they should be telling guys like Sam Adams to shut the hell up and get with the program.
-
-
You are dead on.
Everyone who thinks that the halftime show was so great, has to remember that some of the songs are now nearing 40 years old(Guns n Roses covered “Live and Let Die” 20 years ago). For all you baby boomers, that is the equivalent of you having to listen to the big band sounds of the 30's and 40's. Could you imagine having to listen to Benny Goodman?
Think how you felt when everyone told you how great that music was and how your music is crap. Everyone always thinks that their generations’ music is the best and everyone else’s is crap.
Bottom line is that music is a young person’s game and watching ageing stars, like Paul McCartney was not only boring but painful.
i'm totally up on new indie music and have lots of friends in that segment of the music industry, and i'd love to have seen benny goodman. what the kids are listening to isn't the only thing that's good, you know ...
-
When Andre "bumped" the ref, the Bills had to go for the field goal. They recovered the onside kick and Flutie was sacked on the subsequent series.
This occured the same season as the "just give it to them" non-reception + end zone Hail Mary pass interference game against the Bills in New England. If I ever felt there was an x-files type conspiracy against the Bills, that was the year. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: zebras
BTW, my vote goes to Andre. Eric has never been ever to go over the middle like Andre did - he was fearless.
i do think moulds 1998 season - when he and flutie really worked well together and flutie did a great job of getting the ball to him - was a better season than reed ever had. not a ton of receptions for moulds (67) but lots of yards, a ton of big plays, and lots of tds. plus 240 yards v. miami in the playoffs ....
-
this thread -- in which bledsoe has been compared favorably to brady on numerous occasions -- needs to stop!! people, stop deluding yourselves!! simon supplies the relevant details, but all you you need to know is that brady is 10 times the qb that bledsoe ever was, is, and will be.
-
fyi, nyc pays doles out more taxes proportionally to the state than it receives back, and this has been the case for a couple of decades. on the other hand, buffalo -- my beloved hometown -- is a charity case, receiving more from the state than it puts in proportionally. the greatest myth among western nyers is that they subsidize ny. the reverse is actually the case, and has been for many years.
-
a key difference between the bills and the pats
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
excellent point, gerry. bill walsh always said that what made a defense great was a terrific 4th quarter pass rush, and i can remember numerous games where bruce brought it in the 4th - against philly in the mid-90s, against the raiders in the freezer bowl game in the january 94 playoffs, against drew bledsoe in the mid 90s one year - the list goes on. no one now can do that. bruce was so damn good - best ever, in my opinion.