stevewin Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 (edited) Some people are missing the point - it's not about whether they would have moved the ball by running - the point is - you run it at least on 1st down - get (hopefully) at least some minimal positive yardage - and KC has no time outs AND THE CLOCK KEEPS RUNNING. THEN you can decide to go for the jugular etc. etc. on the next two downs (and you still have your own TOs if you need to stop the clock) - but at least make sure that if you don't get the first or get the winning kick you don't leave too much time left on the clock for them to come down and win it. Edited October 31, 2010 by stevewin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffOrange Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 You're not allowed to talk about this on the WGR post-game show. You're also not allowed to talk about this on Sal Cappacio's ridiculous Justin TV post-game show. You're not allowed to talk about it on WGR because "everyone loved Ryan Fitzpatrick last week so why would they want to take the ball out of his hands this week!?1" and "You don't know enough about the defensive formations to know if the run would have even made sense there~!" (???) You're not allowed to talk about it on Sal's show because "I used to coach high school football and I have decided that this isn't an issue therefore by edict of Sal, because high school football coaches are really knowledgeable about the NFL and are allowed to make edicts and things, it is not to be spoken about." You know what's as bad as the game? The awful post game shows for this team. My goodness. This is one of the biggest points of the game. How about running it just once? How about the running an empty backfield set from the 42 yard line. THIS **** MAKES NO SENSE. I wish SOMEBODY was talking about it, so thank you. WGR is right. Complaining about play-calling is for mouth-breathing losers. Poor play-calling every game, every year. Yah, that's why we've sucked for a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFITZ1 Posted October 31, 2010 Author Share Posted October 31, 2010 This is about smart clock management. What about play-action or a naked bootleg? The Bills were in a position to either win the game on sound execution or tie it on poor execution. With 1:30 left, no KC time outs, and 1st and ten from the KC 41 (or whatever), KC should have been given no opportunity to win this game. That is inexcusable for an NFL head coach. WGR is right. Complaining about play-calling is for mouth-breathing losers. Poor play-calling every game, every year. Yah, that's why we've sucked for a decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paup 1995MVP Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 The play calling was horrible on the last drive of regulation and both drives in OT as soon as we crossed midfield. We do not have a good enough O line to run empty backfield 5 wide against any good front seven such as KC. A couple of draws to Fred on the last drive would have made a huge difference. Even on 3rd and 10, a draw gives us a shot at a FG instead of an intentional grounding. Gailey has a terrible feel for the game. One thing we do not have which just about every other team in the league has is a big tight end to throw to for key catches over the middle. Shawn Nelson was not on the field for one offensive play today (correct me if I am wrong) and we do not send Martin out on pass patterns. In a key situation most teams throw to the big 6'5" TE over the middle. Instead we are constantly looking for Roscoe and Lee when they know we are throwing. Big difference. Gailey is a lousy game manager who is not putting his team in the best position to win. His play calling in crunch time is as bad as any coach we have had this past decade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 Ironically, the rap on Jauron in the Cleveland MNF game was that, barely within FG range, he called three straight runs. "Pass the ball!" TSW yelled... "Don't be satisfied with just being barely in range..." Truth is, any call looks bad if it does not work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muffmonster Posted October 31, 2010 Share Posted October 31, 2010 Ironically, the rap on Jauron in the Cleveland MNF game was that, barely within FG range, he called three straight runs. "Pass the ball!" TSW yelled... "Don't be satisfied with just being barely in range..." Truth is, any call looks bad if it does not work out. That is a very good point. I think we would like to meet at a happy medium where you aren't super conservative, yet not extremely brazen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonechiller Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I still don't think Chan cares if he wins! He is still evaluating players for the future, Fitz has looked like he might be the answer, at least adequate. Chan needed to find out if he could pull off the game himself! Win and everything is great Lose and we still have dibs on top pick in draft. CANT LOSE, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Well when I stated moving better through the air I was referring strictly to the OT. I don't count Fitz scramble as a run, so taking that one out I, looking at the play by play I see one handoff to Jackson for 3 yards. That's what my statement was based on. Fair 'nuff. I remember it differently, so I went back to the gamebook and looked. If you look at the first two series only by # yds, you've got a good point, more yards by pass. If you look at it by productivity per play, 9 plays for 53 yds by pass, 2 plays 16 yds by run. That's 8 yds per run play on the run, a bit under 6 yds per pass play. (I'm not counting the scramble as run since you didn't) I guess I'm not seeing the "move better through the air" bit. So that says to me...keep mixing it up, don't get pass-happy. OT overall, its 5 run plays for 26 yds (5.2 yds per play) and 15 pass plays for net 38 (53-15) yds (bit over 2.5 yds per play). Heartbreakingly, if we could even have gotten 3 yds per run and 2 more runs on the 2nd series, we would have been 6 yds closer, and maybe the 2nd FG makes it. If we ran 2 more times on the last series and skip the IG penalty, maybe we have a makeable FG or don't have to punt. I know, MayBes don't fly in October I just don't Get It why move away from a balanced attack and take away any need for the defense to guess? Here's the play by play for anyone interested: 1st series: R Parrish 13 yd run (F. Jackson handoff) Incomplete pass Incomplete pass Pass to F. Jackson 3 yd Punt 2nd series: Pass to R. Parrish 12 yd F. Jackson 3 yd run Incomplete pass Pass to L. Evans 17 yd Pass to L. Evans 21 yd Incomplete pass Incomplete pass Fitzpatrick scramble 3 yd Missed FG 3rd series Incomplete pass F. Jackson 5 yd F. Jackson 4 yd F. Jackson 1 yd Scramble 14 yd Incomplete pass Incomplete pass Incomplete pass - 15 yd intentional grounding Punt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFITZ1 Posted November 1, 2010 Author Share Posted November 1, 2010 Ironically, the rap on Jauron in the Cleveland MNF game was that, barely within FG range, he called three straight runs. "Pass the ball!" TSW yelled... "Don't be satisfied with just being barely in range..." Truth is, any call looks bad if it does not work out. I do remember, but that was a different situation where a FG was needed to prevent a loss. Here, we should not have been in a position to lose. Also, it need not be 3 running plays. Only one or 2 runs were needed to wear down the clock. One pass would've been OK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevewin Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Ironically, the rap on Jauron in the Cleveland MNF game was that, barely within FG range, he called three straight runs. "Pass the ball!" TSW yelled... "Don't be satisfied with just being barely in range..." Truth is, any call looks bad if it does not work out. Not true - the point is, just run the ball on at least ONE of those downs to take some time off the clock. They had no timeouts! You can still either be conservative or "go for the jugular" with the other plays - but three incompletions in a row just gives them the ball back w/ plenty of time on the clock. It is inexcusable that happens. It is just common sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 At 0-6 you play for the win. That's why Chan called pass plays. It was no gimme for Lindell from where they were. Besides I know for a fact that no one would have been happy with a tie either. PTR Ironically, the rap on Jauron in the Cleveland MNF game was that, barely within FG range, he called three straight runs. "Pass the ball!" TSW yelled... "Don't be satisfied with just being barely in range..." Truth is, any call looks bad if it does not work out. I'm glad someone has a memory. PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I agree Chan got pass-happy at the end. Once he got into 2-minute mode, he never got out. This is why he was fired from KC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 Why did Gailey call 3 pass plays with 1:30 left and 3 yards from FRG range? KC had no time outs and there was ample opportunity to win or at least tie and break this d@#$ losing streak. I thought that horrendous play calling left with Jauron. It's not that we lost, but we lost by the coach being stupid. Buffalo fans have put up with enough stupidity. I'm madder than Carl Palladino! I blame this loss on bad play calling by Gailey: bad bad bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I agree Chan got pass-happy at the end. Once he got into 2-minute mode, he never got out. This is why he was fired from KC Agreed. And it seemed like he was hell bent on proving Haley wrong the way he stayed with the spread offense that wasn't working all that well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PromoTheRobot Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I agree Chan got pass-happy at the end. Once he got into 2-minute mode, he never got out. This is why he was fired from KC As if Charlie Weiss coached a masterpiece? PTR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
San-O Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I agree Chan got pass-happy at the end. Once he got into 2-minute mode, he never got out. This is why he was fired from KC Shades of Gilbride? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Lightning Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 My voice was hoarse yelling "just run the damn ball!" Chan called a great game but g'damn it some positive yards and we wouldn't have needed OT to begin with. Then again in OT. I just don't get it. As for Fitz...gutsy game but if he had just some more accuracy we'd have this game as a win! Spiller was wise open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I'm with you there. Baffling why we never tried to run the ball in those situations. And no play action? Criminy. You don't want Dallas to have the number one pick in the draft do you? Can you believe Dallas is one game better than the Bills! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Vader Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 I'm not sure about teh Ravens, but CG definitely handed this game over complete with KC Barbecue Sauce. No head coach worthy of the title would have let that happen. Gailey does have to take a lot of blaqme for the Ravens game. Granted the Bills had the ball more in the Chiefs OT game, but against the Ravens, Gailey did the same thing. He came out with an empty backfield attempt, never once ran the ball, or even gave the impression that they might run. He relied on winning the game by passing only. Yes Gailey had no control over Nelson's fumble, and Hangartner tossing his helmet, but his playcalling in overtime did not benefit the offense, today or last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wardigital Posted November 1, 2010 Share Posted November 1, 2010 At 0-6 you play for the win. That's why Chan called pass plays. It was no gimme for Lindell from where they were. Besides I know for a fact that no one would have been happy with a tie either. PTR I'm glad someone has a memory. PTR If memory serves correctly, a field goal wins the game. And there is a difference between passing for one series unsuccessfully and passing on four different series in the same situation unsuccessfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts