o.p. native Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Even-handed and very well written. http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/2011-buffalo-bills-season-preview/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Even-handed and very well written. http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/2011-buffalo-bills-season-preview/ "[Fitzpatrick's] presnap recognition is average at best, and because he prefers to hold the ball a long time, defenses often try to force him into impetuous decisions." "Gailey, a run-oriented traditionalist, is installing more spread formations to take better advantage of speed at wide receiver." Not sure I'd agree with those statements... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobChalmers Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Even-handed and very well written. http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/2011-buffalo-bills-season-preview/ This article is absolute junk. Sorry. The author writes with a well-educated style, but his content is every bit as ignorant and made-up as typical Marshall Faulk fare. I'm too tired to rattle off all the inaccuracies. I counted over a dozen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defend Greece Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 This article is absolute junk. Sorry. The author writes with a well-educated style, but his content is every bit as ignorant and made-up as typical Marshall Faulk fare. I'm too tired to rattle off all the inaccuracies. I counted over a dozen. I think we know more than the national media, just garbage The only guy out there worth a !@#$ is fitzbeardy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 This article is absolute junk. Sorry. The author writes with a well-educated style, but his content is every bit as ignorant and made-up as typical Marshall Faulk fare. I'm too tired to rattle off all the inaccuracies. I counted over a dozen. I thought the most glaring one was about Parrish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 "The Bills’ current brain trust has been cool on Parrish, viewing him primarily as a return specialist..." Really? The author got this completely wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwoz Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 At the risk of sounding like a homer, the movie analogies in the blog (as opposed to a real story in the newspaper) were forced and that blunted their impact and frankly, made hime sound like a Jets groupie. While the writer was correct in his observation that, "You don’t need to be first class in all categories to win in the N.F.L.," he seems to totally dismiss the Bills as last year's team without acknowledging their changes for 2011. The writer (and you must understand this guy is from New York) points to weakness at QB, OL, receivers, running backs and linebackers and opines: "Competing with any of these limitations is difficult, but doable. Now … competing with all of these limitations? Borderline impossible." I'm sure that's his opinion, but opinions are like a**holes, everbody has one. My feeling is that the Bills will be lucky to win eight games this season. But they're not going to be pushovers and any team that takes them too lightly will be unpleasantly surprised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobChalmers Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) I thought the most glaring one was about Parrish. Yup - that one was right up there for sure. Completely ignorant statement. I was also fascinated to see Torbor will be starting next to Barnett. I'm sure Andra Davis will be facinated by that too. (Torbor has a decent chance of being cut, IMO - though Maybin's release helped him out.) Honestly, anyone who is predicting the Bills finishing behind the Dolphins this year isn't paying any attantion at all to either team. Edited August 16, 2011 by BobChalmers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CodeMonkey Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I found the article to be fair and well written like the OP stated. Sure there are inaccuracies as others pointed out, but you need to remember this writer does not live in Buffalo and probably has not been to camp. His opinion on the Bills comes from the outside looking in. So yeah he will get some minor points wrong, but the general message of the story in my opinion is accurate. If you have two stories written by competent writers for established organizations, one writer covers one team strictly and spends all of his/her time getting every nuance of the team perfect, and the other who watches multiple teams at a distance and does not get emotionally involved with any one team. Which story is most likely to give an accurate assessment of a team? I'll give you a hint, it's not the one written by the homer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Lousy offensive line...he's got that. I'm not sure about his reservations on Fitz though. I didn't see him as any great scrambler or as a guy inclined to scramble (rebmember "happy feet" rob Johnson?). I think Fitz is a good solid qb but would not have opposed the author pointing out that Brady and Sanchez are head and shoulders above him at the moment. Spiller might be good, the receivers might be good and Fitz might be good, but unless we have an offensive line we are never going to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K Gun Special Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Lousy offensive line...he's got that. I'm not sure about his reservations on Fitz though. I didn't see him as any great scrambler or as a guy inclined to scramble (rebmember "happy feet" rob Johnson?). I think Fitz is a good solid qb but would not have opposed the author pointing out that Brady and Sanchez are head and shoulders above him at the moment. Spiller might be good, the receivers might be good and Fitz might be good, but unless we have an offensive line we are never going to find out. I dont totally agree, even with a poor O line you should see flashes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I dont totally agree, even with a poor O line you should see flashes. I kind of agree, but it is a little to horrible to contemplate that there is an offensive line problem but its okay because the running game, qb and receivers suck.... Seriously I think Fitz and Johnson showed flashes and Jackson ran well even with a bad offensive line. If we fix the line (rember the Jets getting Ferguson, Mangold and others before they got Sanchez.)we can really move forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I found the article to be fair and well written like the OP stated. Sure there are inaccuracies as others pointed out, but you need to remember this writer does not live in Buffalo and probably has not been to camp. His opinion on the Bills comes from the outside looking in. So yeah he will get some minor points wrong, but the general message of the story in my opinion is accurate. Agreed. People just get upset when someone outside Buffalo pisses on the annual August optimism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I found the article to be fair and well written like the OP stated. Sure there are inaccuracies as others pointed out, but you need to remember this writer does not live in Buffalo and probably has not been to camp. His opinion on the Bills comes from the outside looking in. So yeah he will get some minor points wrong, but the general message of the story in my opinion is accurate. If you have two stories written by competent writers for established organizations, one writer covers one team strictly and spends all of his/her time getting every nuance of the team perfect, and the other who watches multiple teams at a distance and does not get emotionally involved with any one team. Which story is most likely to give an accurate assessment of a team? I'll give you a hint, it's not the one written by the homer. Excellent comments. What the writer is basically saying is that the Bills lack enough talent to be a serious team but are at least scrappy. It seems that over the past generation most "outside" commentators preview the Bills as being a lower tiered team. That elicits the standard outrage by the hometown crowd. Shortly after the season begins it becomes very obvious that the "outsiders" were correct in their analysis and the "hommies" were not only very wrong but had "off the wall" expectations. The central problem with the franchise has little to do with the team; it has more to do with the organization. The owner has designed a business model that is very lucrative for him but is not designed to compete on the field. When you compare how the Bills are structured and staffed compared to most other teams then it becomes very evident that the same scenario is going to be played out year after year with little variation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8-8 Forever? Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 "[Fitzpatrick's] presnap recognition is average at best, and because he prefers to hold the ball a long time, defenses often try to force him into impetuous decisions." "Gailey, a run-oriented traditionalist, is installing more spread formations to take better advantage of speed at wide receiver." Not sure I'd agree with those statements... Until the Bills start winning against good teams the media will pay very little attention to them beyond pre-season stock review pieces that guys have to write. Win some games and then we can complain we are not getting any love. Until then, we need to shut our pie holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 "[Fitzpatrick's] presnap recognition is average at best, and because he prefers to hold the ball a long time, defenses often try to force him into impetuous decisions." "Gailey, a run-oriented traditionalist, is installing more spread formations to take better advantage of speed at wide receiver." Not sure I'd agree with those statements... Gaily might have been noted for running the ball because of his past with the Steelers and Cowboys, but just like Jauron in Chicago had a history of being run oriented, both men seemed to have changed philosophies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leper65 Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I did like this line: "Maybin plays hard, much in the same way William Hung sang hard." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) Lousy offensive line...he's got that. I'm not sure about his reservations on Fitz though. I didn't see him as any great scrambler or as a guy inclined to scramble (rebmember "happy feet" rob Johnson?). I think Fitz is a good solid qb but would not have opposed the author pointing out that Brady and Sanchez are head and shoulders above him at the moment. Spiller might be good, the receivers might be good and Fitz might be good, but unless we have an offensive line we are never going to find out. Gotta disagree on Fitz, last year he was about as good a scrambler as you can get in the NFL, only Mike Vick had a slightly better yard per carry average rush at 6.7 or so. He was the leading Bills rusher in that first Jets game and was literally running for his life on every play. However, I do agree that the writers assessment of how Fitz scrambles is all wrong. Plus he didn't hold the ball long at all, that ball was out and gone in around 3 seconds or less every play. Fitz only had happy feet because during the first 8 games he had inferior protection and was forced to scramble around quite a bit Edited August 16, 2011 by Harvey lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Until the Bills start winning against good teams the media will pay very little attention to them beyond pre-season stock review pieces that guys have to write. Win some games and then we can complain we are not getting any love. Until then, we need to shut our pie holes. You make an excellent point about the Bills being incapable against good teams, a more accurate reflection of how good your team actually is. The below link with some variations on the calculation on one's record against winning teams is not only astoundingly bad but it is simply embarrassing. The stats vary from .254 to .194 to .184. What more can be said or cited to demonstrate the futility of this franchise? http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/2823/in-playoff-drought-bills-194-against-winners Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
muffmonster Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 (edited) "[Fitzpatrick's] presnap recognition is average at best, and because he prefers to hold the ball a long time, defenses often try to force him into impetuous decisions." "Gailey, a run-oriented traditionalist, is installing more spread formations to take better advantage of speed at wide receiver." Not sure I'd agree with those statements... That is what stuck out to me as well. Are we sure the author doesn't think we have Trent still as our QB? I always thought one of Fitz's glaring strengths was his brain, and ability to read defenses and adjust pre-snap. Edited August 16, 2011 by muffmonster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts