thebandit27 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Unless I am mistaken, if the Bills continue to have more points than their opponents when the clock shows 00:00 in the 4th quarter, they'll continue to win. /thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 In every tie breaker scenario importance is given to certain games. First comes head to head, then division games, then conference games. This leaves non-conference games like the one against the Eagles as the odd man out. Let's say the Bills end up tied with a team that went 0-4 vs the NFC and that the Bills lose their remaining games and finish 1-3. If it is a team we did not play this year and they weren't in our division, then the Bills would lose out because they beat the Eagles. haha except we would wouldn't be tied with them if we lost yesterday so we would lose out to that team anyways........Am i missing something and is something going over my head or did something go over your head. Because that makes 0 sense to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 haha except we would wouldn't be tied with them if we lost yesterday so we would lose out to that team anyways........Am i missing something and is something going over my head or did something go over your head. Because that makes 0 sense to me Can you name a year where tie breakers did not come into play in the NFL? The Bills are not in a bad position with tie breakers. YET. Not too many teams will go 0-4 v. the NFC so 1-3 and maybe even 2-2 won't kill them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numark Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Can you name a year where tie breakers did not come into play in the NFL? The Bills are not in a bad position with tie breakers. YET. Not too many teams will go 0-4 v. the NFC so 1-3 and maybe even 2-2 won't kill them. I am having trouble understanding how winning hurt? (being sincere) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QCity Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 In every tie breaker scenario importance is given to certain games. First comes head to head, then division games, then conference games. This leaves non-conference games like the one against the Eagles as the odd man out. Let's say the Bills end up tied with a team that went 0-4 vs the NFC and that the Bills lose their remaining games and finish 1-3. If it is a team we did not play this year and they weren't in our division, then the Bills would lose out because they beat the Eagles. Your logic is broken. Actually, you can't even call that logic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I think you're trying too hard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 It will be interesting to see as the weather turns in the remaining home games how that impacts the situation. Buffalo is an interesting team - in the "old days" wing a "defensive struggle" or low scoring game was considered a "good" win. Now winning a shootout game through offensive firepower is perceived to be less brilliant by some. No doubt the Bills D has to improve - especially at the edges. The good news is that they are one or two LB's and dline depth away from being able to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Your logic is broken. Actually, you can't even call that logic. Short on specifics, long on mean. Bad combination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 You think you're going to take flak for that? You have some things in there which can be argued back and forth. I was going to start a thread based purely on the FACT that yesterday's win hurt the Bills in every imaginable tie breaker scenario but I decided against it because of all the dust that would stir up and that is even though it is based on FACTS. Your post is based largely on opinions and/or interpretation of facts, therefore you should expect arguments. I shouldn't have to expect arguments but people are emotional and would argue anyway. Some people just hate facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Unless I am mistaken, if the Bills continue to have more points than their opponents when the clock shows 00:00 in the 4th quarter, they'll continue to win. /thread Amen. Though may I add, if the Bills makes a practice of taking 31-14 leads into the fourth quarter, they are likely to win a lot of games as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 You are right- we need to get better on the line of scrimmage and while Fitz' play is admirable, I think we will need to replace him at some point. I am happy at 4-1 right now, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 "Don't believe the hype." -- S George Wilson, a few moments ago passing through the media room. jw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 "Don't believe the hype." -- S George Wilson, a few moments ago passing through the media room. jw Talking about the Eagles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 Don't believe the hype.-- S George Wilson, a few moments ago passing through the media room. jw Care to elaborate? What hype? By whom? Who's believing what? Inquiring minds want to know.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExWNYer Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 "Don't believe the hype." -- S George Wilson, a few moments ago passing through the media room. jw Care to elaborate? What hype? By whom? Who's believing what? Inquiring minds want to know.... This is a little cryptic, John. Can you put it into context? Was it a reference to the overblown lovefest for the Iggles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xsoldier54 Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 I know I'm going to take some flak for this, and that there will be no shortage of people willing to write comments like "we're 4-1, be happy," or "a win is a win. It doesn't matter how you do it." But a method of winning that will work over the long haul is fundamentally different from, and superior to, a method of winning that will soon fizzle out. The Bills' method of winning seems to be in the latter category. Against the I-95 teams the Bills have played thus far (Patriots and Eagles), the Bills had nine takeaways and no giveaways. And yet, despite that insane +9 turnover differential, the Bills won both games by the skin of their teeth. This means that the Bills were significantly outplayed in the non-turnover aspects of the game, and needed all of those nine turnovers to eke out wins. What happens when the Bills fail to achieve this kind of ridiculously one-sided turnover ratio? Statistically, a good turnover ratio is highly correlated with wins, for obvious reasons. But teams' turnover ratios tend to change significantly from one season to the next. Two seasons ago that worked in the Bills' favor, as there were games Byrd won almost singlehandedly. His turnovers made the Bills' record better than its talent level would otherwise have dictated. Last season Byrd's turnovers dried up, and were no longer available to mask the team's overall lack of talent. That's why the Bills went 4-12. This season the turnovers are back again and (in combination with KC's implosion) are the main pillar of Buffalo's fast start. I do not believe that attaining turnovers at this ridiculous pace is sustainable, any more than the insane pace Byrd set during his rookie year was sustainable. This should not be taken to mean that all is gloom and doom, or an implication that the team will never amount to anything. What it does mean is that Nix's rebuilding process is not as far along as the Bills' current record would seem to indicate. This team needs to play better in the non-turnover-related aspects of the game if its current success is to be sustainable. Maybe some of that can come from younger players already on the roster learning to improve. Byrd himself is a good example of this: he's playing better this year than last year. I also suspect the Bills will need at least one or two good drafts before they can truly become one of the NFL's top teams. You're right, I am going to give you some flak. I was at the game yesterday and the Bills were clearly the better team. What matters is the left hand column in the standings and the more wins they get the better their chances of winning a playoff spot. They will win games differently based on the opposition. If you thought that the Bills or anyone else for that matter was going to completely shut down the Patriots and Eagles offenses, then you are seriously misguided. The fact is they had four picks, which is the most anyone has ever gotten on Vick. That was a good defensive effort regardless of how many points they allowed. They made plays when they needed to and they won the game. That is what matters. Nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsWatch Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 They can sometimes be viewed as symptoms of something more - In our case, on many of the turnovers, they are the result of pressure on the QB, blocking QB's throwing lanes, being super aggressive after the ball is "caught" by the opponent, etc. Vick said as much after the game that he threw balls when he shouldn't have or should have taken the sack due to the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delete This Account Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 (edited) George was "playfully" referring to his numbers. jw Edited October 10, 2011 by john wawrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 George was "playfully" referring to his numbers. jw thanks! if you happen to talk to him again... tell him to enjoy the hype... it is much deserved after the game he played yesterday! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Senator Posted October 10, 2011 Share Posted October 10, 2011 The Senator was awesome yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts