colin

someone made a post about our coaches being great monday to sat, but not so much on sunday. i think that is the crux of the issue. i think they go conservative, but in a bad way, which is to say afraid of making changes later in the game. we saw that vs KC and new england. we had some success of sorts in both games early, but later on we got mashed on D (it was much better vs NE than KC obv, but still). our constant 3rd quarter under performance has shown this too. not, i will say vs jests and faketriots we seemed to show improve in the 3rd quarter at least, but then the pats ran the same dang play on us like every time, including on 3rd downs, and it was working! the one drive when they just like hurry up ran on us to a TD showed me they saw us lined up a certain way and knew they had a play to beat it, and we didn't adjust at all. so anyhow, our corches need to have a couple plans, or learn to figure things out on the fly, but i do think they get guys prepared and motivated.

i dont' disagree, but we only ever have 2 LBs out there, and we have like no one healthy who can play the position. i suppose a healthy milano and edmunds can change that, but i don't see it thus far. the entire d line not being effective is the biggest issue. we made mistakes bringing in who we did vs who we let go (shoulda grabbed clown and kept shak, cut murph, brought in a real 1 tech and maybe even kept phillips, i dunno). most money in the nfl on the d line and no pass rush or run stuffing. you hate to see it.

im even more convinced the scheme we run is just a bit too fragile for who we have out there. penetration by a fast and fresh (cuz of depth) d line isn't there, and the no call holding might cook us on that. only two LBs out there means they have to read and move with less margin of error. milano seems like he can do that most of the time, edmunds seems paralyzed reading the play (he made some huge individual plays last year with his size and speed when he didn't have to scan like a camera all the time), klien is a straight up non starter getting starter money. behind that, we have a bunch of tiny DBs. they are capable players and play hard, but not the best tacklers and at times physically over matched. i suppose w a lead this d COULD be nasty again (although hasn't been, even with a lead) but im starting to get convinced that 49 is simply out of position at MLB, and we need 3 lbs at least some of the time.

you're in the wrong neighborhood if you think things like facts and statistics have ANY place in this discussion.

Trash read and throw by allen, but that pos winters put us there. Idiot corches need to put in bates, just pathetic

Need to get some space running it and throw in first down. We are in a goofy position on the oline to get stuck in 3rd and long, but we pass best on 1st, so dabol has to early his pay

We gotta get bates back at c and mongo at lg. Can't play w such a scrub at lg like we have now.

i think all d's started out weak w no camp, and the bills scheme was perhaps worse and fell off more. then, edmunds got hurt and stayed hurt, milano was out and missing games, and our cb situation was a mess, white isn't right and we've had norman just stinking for nearly a month. a power running w mobile qb new england in bad weather is a perfect test for the d to get back on track

i remember glennon, drafted by the bucks after EJ and Geno. i also remember playing them that year, losing to them, and realizing glennon was better than both of them, and that he wasn't actually good. i also remember like a year or two later the brocket launcher got drafted by denver and signed by houston (cuz he won a superbowl for denver when he started a few games, but didn't play in the bowl, and manning was toast). as much talent as the jets wasted w geno and the bills did w EJ, that houston team had that one star WR, solid running, and a sick sick d, and lost to new england in the playoffs because brocket could not make a single play. im so happy we don't have a zero at qb anymore.

PFF blows, but this does kinda show that our D Scheme is a big "fragile". the whole 1/11 concept would mean that you don't need individual outperformers to win matchups for the d to be effective, but in the case of our D, it kinda means if any of the 11 aren't up to the task, the the whole bottom falls out. we've had good success overall, so im not about ditching it, but if we have 2 LBs on the roster who can play at all, it kinda sucks that the d goes to pot if either of them are hurt. based on guys like klien coming in and just being useless, it also seems like the requirements of the d on certain positions is a bit much. i remember back in the day, urlacher and ray lewis were the top two MLBs in the nfl. lewis had more team success in the NFL, but honestly, i think urlacher could have done Lewis's job in baltimore, but no way lewis could have run and covered the middle like urlacher did in chicago. not saying urlacher was a much (or at all) better player than ray, but if you have a requirement of positions that you don't have guys meet, it makes you wonder if some changes are needed. in theory, we ask less of our corners than other teams, which i suppose means we can have a 7th round rookie come out and ball like we did vs the jets (yes, they suck, i know), but it's still nfl football and if a corner can't run w a guy he's toast. anyhow, i hope they decide to get aggressive, we are just a better d playing that way and we aren't staffed or schemed to bottle teams up, we need to disrupt. i heard a podcast (cover 1) where they had a pats beat guy on. he said their LB, number 51, was too slow and cumbersome to be in space, so after getting exploited doing that by san fran, the pats just had 51 line up close and rush, more or less like a d lineman. the genius of billicheat is that he gets guys who can do things he needs, and also changes up schemes to confuse the other team and generally avoids asking his guys to do something they aren't good at. so you get patrick chung being a star for them when he's really not a fast guy playing safety, and he's not agile for the position either. since we are more of a team scheme'd D, i don't think we have the flexibility that the pats do from a coaching standpoint, but i think if things aren't working you may as well err on the side of aggression, because you don't want the opponent to be comfortable. . here's to hoping we have it figured out now for the rest of the season.

good stuff Oppie. so, i was somewhat aghast with what we were paying for who we were paying, their age, and that we let younger at least somewhat proven performers go. i think these deals were all just structured as one year rentals, taking advantage of the excess cap we had. in that case, i'm less disgusted with what we did. we will have money (unless cap capsizes, which will mess up a ton of teams and maybe create opportunities) to sign a real guy to a long term contract.

im of two minds on edmunds. he absolutely gets washed way too often. the rumblings cap of the end zone run to the offensive left where the right guard just shoves him and he falls down, that's basic MLB play. if he keeps his balance and uses his hands to get off the block faster, he has a shot at a play, potentially stopping a TD. he also over runs or over shoots w bad angles more than he should. on the other hand, our d schematically has only 2 LBs who for the most part play the same position. they have to take on blockers and drop back and run upfield w pass catchers, and their assignment has a lot of variance vs say an OLB in a 3-4 who covers much less ground and has much less to think about. the biggest issue to me is our D is this kinda of rubicks cube of every part has to fit with somewhat small tolerances for it to work. one thing of note vs the jets (and yes, it's the jets) is that even with the rookies and practice squad guys in there (including epensa im happy to say) the d seems to be much much better when it is aggressive, and more guys are moving forward. aside from just bad DL play for about a month (and that's disgusting because of how much we spend on that) it really seems like being aggressive and gunning for a negative play on the first 2 downs setting up third and long is what we need to get back too. the 3rd and way longs we have allowed are disgusting, but in part i think it's because the plays called have had the D play on their heels too much, instead of coming downhill and forcing the issue

im sure they like him, but healthy scratch means they don't want him, obv because of his performance. spain was at least OK, on par w ford more or less, but ford has upside and is cheaper, and they let him walk, so i think at least part of the positive speak about phillips is because he's taking getting benched better than spain did. spain moped and moaned and got cut. what a bad signing that was.

i know that, and i don't care. if we actually pull off the next two (long odds) i will be a zubaz wearing psycho homer, at least until a few minutes into the game where we make some bad mistake, then i will be chicken little. it is my right as a bills fan.

never forget, you must REMEMBER THE TITANS. i'll see myself out.

the current format but with 15 minutes is best. ncaa stuff is stupid, kicking the ball is part of the game.

i remember epenesa making one play where he lined up, the db behind him smacked his right hip, epenesa move to his right, and a sweep came right at him and he made a sure tackle for 0 yards. makes me think maybe he can play, but he hasn't figured out the d yet.

if we can ship out murphy and harrison philips (assuming the front office is done w harry) then i'll take mercilus and a big body from either of the NY teams. if we are really gonna run a nickle only D, we need more D linemen. i would like a real SAM but i don't know that we can change our scheme mid season.

aside from losing so many solid players, cam newton is a shell of his former self and i don't think he's really healthy. BB is obv a sick coach, but that just isn't a really good roster.

if we win the next two i will be ABSOLUTELY expecting a win in zona. i won't be able to help myself.

i think this thread is spot on. josh takes a little longer to find his target on most multi target plays (he's gotten a lot better at quick screens tho). he's got the talent and arm to buy himself some time. but that weakness is emphasized and that positive ability is negated with goofy slow forming plays, MOST OF ALL WHEN THE FIELD IS SHORTER! we should tend to have a fast first or second read for allen, because that gives him a chance to go through his reads and go back if need be. he can also tuck the rock and just murder a deep drop D, but slow forming plays in compressed space remove that too. we had one audible into a run by allen where the halfback came through the hole and blocked. allen got tackled about 3 or 4 yards up, but it was for a first down. a missed tackle on a play like that can break for a score, and it's going to pull the LBs up. dabo likes to either keep going to the qb run, or just throw it out totally, never really setting up the d with the same look to set up play action which gets the LBs fooled quickly after the snap. the stuff NE is doing w newton or what andy reid always does works this way very well, we need a coach for our offensive coaches.

bro, i am now able to call out ahead of time if a play called (almost always on 3rd down or in the red zone) is going to fail or not because it takes too long to develop. the timing of the play call vs a given D formation and down and distance is the art of calling plays IMO, execution, prep, and deep understanding of what the D is weak to is the science. the higher the stakes get, the worse at the former dabo gets. early in games he gets teams fooled, and on first down, or 3rd and passing (in general) this O has had some good success, but you can just feel the O get tight because they have simply too high of a degree of difficulty built into the play call. the trickery part of it might even be worse. i swear dabo read the "advanced stats" goofery that said that play action works no matter how well you have been running the ball. what that fails to take into account is play action works only if you can fool the D into thinking you might actually run it. formation and down and distance can really tip the d off, so you still need to fool the D, so it needs to look like a play where you have run or should run out of. that double fake screen which was supposed to be a TE screen over the gut was the dumbest thing around. we weren't killing them on screens enough to fake it one way, let alone two, and our screens tend to be a touch slower w the back further out, not the NE stuff where the DE or LB comes crashing at the QB and only then does the ball get passed (they also get away w illegal man downfield all the time, but i digress). and of course we got called for illegal man and the play had no chance. we did that inside the like 20 or 25, when the jets are in a zone with no room to work. we have so much success out of 4 or 5 wide that A) we should keep doing it and B) we aren't setting up any real tendencies for a double fake reverse or screen so it makes those much harder trick plays even dumber. i do give him credit for not stinking as bad as usual in the 3rd, and he actually called some decent run plays, but he pays no mind to setting the O up with a few bread and butter formations and personal groups where we can play advantage and get the D going the wrong way when we need to.

im getting ahead of myself but i am allowed because i am a fan. so, assuming ne just still stinks and our d has figured out how not to be the worst, and we win that game, can we hope to split w these teams? we'd need brown and at least one more TE, and mongo back to have a shot i think. edmunds getting better would help too. tall order tho

The odds are long, very long

Well, the take away is we fixed the d (yeah jets suck) and moved the ball well, we just had bad luck and mistakes in the redzone. I'll take it, now we gotta crush the pats