The Big Cat

Ha! BillsBackersofChicago will appreciate this (he knows those guys)

Can you provide multiple, ongoing examples of this? Because you keep harping on it like it's a thing.

Okay.

All-22 showed the left side has been CONSISTENTLY befuddled by stunts since week 3.

Week 8 - Bills @ Jets--WIN Week 10 - KC @ Buff--WIN Week 11 - Bills @ Fish--LOSS Week 12 - Jets @ Bills--WIN Week 13 - Browns @ Bills--WIN Week 14 - Bills @ Denver--LOSS Week 15 - Packers @ Bills--LOSS Week 16 - Bills @ Oakland--WIN Week 17 - Bills at NE*--LOSS

Week 14 Denver

I I don't think you and I have been this divergent since you tried so tirelessly to convince me that cutting Lee Evans would have a seriously negative impact on our team.

But we're right back to where we were about an hour ago: you assume your ideas are a cure-all. You assume that you know more about the players' strengths than the coordinators do. You assume Marrone has some vendetta against ideas. Yet you ignore what K-9 and I have been saying about how spreading it out by no means is a guarantee for success. You also haven't answered my questions about how often you think they SHOULD employ that strategy and how often you think they do now.

Okay, well I maintain that it will expose our line, so this is where we disagree. Are you also suggesting we NEVER run these concepts, because I think it's clear we do. And please provide a pct. of plays you think we should run these plays and please also estimate how frequently they're run now.

I honestly don't know what you're basing that on and I don't know enough to argue with you about it. But you seem too eager to glom to it as a truth when it makes your point. Just being honest.

Okay, think of a percentage you think the Bills SHOULD run these formations, then try and guess what the actual number is. I'm curious what your perception is, and I'll gladly do the research to determine what the numbers really are. I also think the offense is a state of evolution. I think it's clear that Orton gives them WAY more flexiblity than EJ ever did, I HOPE Brown is better suited to run for three to five yards on first down like CJ was supposed to and I think we're going to see a complete re-shuffling of the OLine at the bye. So again, I think most of these critiques of Hackett are entirely premature and woefully oblivious to the personnel limitations he's faced the entire time he's been in Buffalo.

Okay, well again, you've decided that an unseen scenario is superior to what we have seen. And I maintain that our OLine's inconsistency (putting it nicely) is something you're severely overlooking. I haven't ignored it. K-9 and I are saying the exact same thing. Our OLine can't block the guy in front of them. They need all the help the can get JUST to keep their own guy out of the backfield. Letting the go one-on-one while Orton plays dink and dunk is a recipe for disaster.

You're calling for a complete revamp of the offense in a three week period to account for a guy who wasn't in training camp. Just so we're clear on the ask.

In Orton's three starts we've played three of the top 10 sack defenses in the league. Also, you're analyzing something that had middling success by comparing it to something which you assume would have success while putting the onus on me to prove to you that the reality you've created that doesn't exist is inferior.

If it were this easy, everyone would do it.

When did I say that? And why do we so fondly remember the spread we hated when Chan used it?

I understand the concept. But I'm not confident in our line giving Orton time with only four rushers.

If you don't want to be accused of strawmen arguments, the least you could do is repeat back the words I used. "Has barely stumbled" vs. "has rarely been stymied." One (the one I didn't say) implies an offense galloping along with rarely an obstruction in sight. The other suggests that the offense hasn't been regularly confused by the defenses...because...it hasn't been. They're prepared for the looks, they have receivers running free and from a COORDINATOR's standpoint, they've been consistently adequate in designing plays to account for the tendencies of the opposing defense.

Except...again...I never said the offense was great. That was the strawman YOU made, buddy. Try to keep up.

Manning

In fact I went out of my way to make sure that nobody thought I was arguing that the offense was great. But if that's the case you need me to make for YOUR point to hold up, fine. They call that a straw man. Where do you think--without looking--the Bills rank in the NFL in 3 and out pct? IF the QB can find the guy quickly and efficiently. Are you comfortable with Orton doing this? If your job was on the line, would you? On the road in Orton's first start against the Lions, would you?

You just call me ignorant, homey? okay, then clarify: we talking top 3 or 5 or top 25?

Because we can't block and because until three weeks ago, we didn't have anyone under center reliable enough to make those pre-snap reads. May be it will be phased in? Who knows? But the OLine is certainly not equipped to stay on an island. Or because we have an unreliable line, banged up flawed RB's and instability at the most important position in professional sports. May be that's why the offense will keep us out of the playoffs. Is it because you're afraid fixing the offense will require more than a firing/hiring? I'm beginning to believe this is the case.

This may sound like complete bull ****, but I think there's a difference between "best" ever and "greatest" ever. IMO "best" narrows it down to top-5, and no, Russel Wilson will not make that list, in spite of his 50 yard rush on Sunday. Also, I think it's been well documented to this point that WILSON did not win the super bowl, their defense and their special teams did. And it was their rushing game that got them there. Will he go down as one of the "greatest" ever? As in like top-30 of all time? May be. May be even top-20. MAY BE.