quinnearlysghost88 Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 and beat the Pats and Texans in their stadiums. The three wins we have were vs inferior teams, and we all but tried to hand the Cardinals the win yesterday. If you keep giving Fitz the opportunity to prove himself (disprove himself?), and you continue to run a passive 2-deep, and you continue to throw more than run, and you continue to force the wild cat, you're not going to win. And I know what's going to happen. Fitz will have a good game vs the Titans, so he'll be the starter at NE, we wont change ANYTHING about our game-planning and we'll get crushed again. It's science. What about our current defense has changed since we gave up two 100 yd rushers and two 100 yd wr at home to NE? Nothing. The only thing that's happened is that we've played inferior teams, so we can have a false, inflated sense of talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 (edited) and beat the Pats and Texans in their stadiums. The three wins we have were vs inferior teams The Cards had won 7 in a row at home (before yesterday )and have beaten the Seahawks, Pats, Dolphins and Eagles this year - none of which has a losing record. How is that an "inferior" opponent? Edited October 15, 2012 by MDH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowery4 Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 The Cards had won 7 in a row at home (before yesterday )and have beaten the Seahawks, Pats, Dolphins and Eagles this year - none of which has a losing record. How is that an "inferior" opponent? I was going to say that same thing. So Xs 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnearlysghost88 Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 The Cards had won 7 in a row at home (before yesterday )and have beaten the Seahawks, Pats, Dolphins and Eagles this year - none of which has a losing record. How is that an "inferior" opponent? I promise I'm not trying to troll. But they beat a few 3-3 teams and that Pats beat themselves by missing that FG. Since when are the Fins and Eagles the gold standard of teams? I will say that the Seahawks win was a quality W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 The Cards had won 7 in a row at home (before yesterday )and have beaten the Seahawks, Pats, Dolphins and Eagles this year - none of which has a losing record. How is that an "inferior" opponent? didn't you get the memo? ANY team we beat is inferior... I promise I'm not trying to troll. But they beat a few 3-3 teams and that Pats beat themselves by missing that FG. Since when are the Fins and Eagles the gold standard of teams? I will say that the Seahawks win was a quality W. just stop man. please. STOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 The Cards had won 7 in a row at home (before yesterday )and have beaten the Seahawks, Pats, Dolphins and Eagles this year - none of which has a losing record. How is that an "inferior" opponent? TBD rule number 2: Anyone the Bills beat is an inferior opponent; we were lucky; it hurts the team because we think we're better than we really are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnearlysghost88 Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 And also the line was only +4.5 for the Bills. We just gave up 100 points in two games and the Cards were 4-1 and playing at home. I don't think I'm the only one who thought they were soft. TBD rule number 2: Anyone the Bills beat is an inferior opponent; we were lucky; it hurts the team because we think we're better than we really are. We beat the 1-6 Browns and the 1-5 Chiefs. What about that isn't inferior?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 We beat the 1-6 Browns and the 1-5 Chiefs. What about that isn't inferior?! I'm sorry, I thought this thread was about the Cardinals game? Weren't they 4-1 and on an 8 game win streak at home? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnearlysghost88 Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 I'm sorry, I thought this thread was about the Cardinals game? Weren't they 4-1 and on an 8 game win streak at home? Like I said: And also the line was only +4.5 for the Bills. We just gave up 100 points in two games and the Cards were 4-1 and playing at home. I don't think I'm the only one who thought they were soft. That's a pretty meek line for a team with an 8-game winning streak at home. Would it be better if I didn't call the Arizona Cardinals inferior? Would that help this argument? Would it be better to just say we handed them the ball in field goal range in the dying seconds of the game and that they lost it for themselves? If he hits that 38-yarder, we're not having this discussion. We STOLE a game, let's stop pretending this was some type of quality show of power on our end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abbottroadwarrior Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 TBD rule number 2: Anyone the Bills beat is an inferior opponent; we were lucky; it hurts the team because we think we're better than we really are. To be fair, considering that Feely had made an incredible kick just moments before, and the Bills offense tried to hand the Cardinals the game with that ill-advised deep throw resulting in a pick, AND the miss/partial block of Feely's near-gimme of a game winning FG, there was definitely some "luck" involved. I was thrilled just as much as the next fan at yesterday's outcome, including the performances of the D-Line, Byrd, and Spiller particularly. But the Bills tried their damndest to hand the Cardinals that game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 I promise I'm not trying to troll. But they beat a few 3-3 teams and that Pats beat themselves by missing that FG. Since when are the Fins and Eagles the gold standard of teams? I will say that the Seahawks win was a quality W. Nobody says the Dolphins and Eagles are gold standards but all of those teams have winning records in games they didn't play the Cardinals. In such games those teams are a combined 13-7. That's a .650 winning percentage which is pretty good in the NFL. So when those clubs play other teams they generally win yet they all lost to the Cards. Yet the Cards are "inferior." And yeah, the Chiefs and Browns are bad - but now we're not giving credit to the Bills for beating teams they should? Isn't that what you want from your team? Most people think Cincy is going to compete for a playoff spot and they just lost to those same Browns. The Ravens struggled mightily with the Chiefs two weeks ago. This is the NFL, not the NCAA, no win is automatic. Not sure why I'm trying to talk sense to you, you clearly have an agenda so I guess I'll let you get back to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnearlysghost88 Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 Nobody says the Dolphins and Eagles are gold standards but all of those teams have winning records in games they didn't play the Cardinals. In such games those teams are a combined 13-7. That's a .650 winning percentage which is pretty good in the NFL. So when those clubs play other teams they generally win yet they all lost to the Cards. Yet the Cards are "inferior." And yeah, the Chiefs and Browns are bad - but now we're not giving credit to the Bills for beating teams they should? Isn't that what you want from your team? Most people think Cincy is going to compete for a playoff spot and they just lost to those same Browns. The Ravens struggled mightily with the Chiefs two weeks ago. This is the NFL, not the NCAA, no win is automatic. Not sure why I'm trying to talk sense to you, you clearly have an agenda so I guess I'll let you get back to it. Whoa, I have no agenda. And you do make some good points what winning pct and no win is a gimme. My main point of the post is we really can't let this win and possibly a good performance vs the Titans give us a false sense that what we're currently doing, in terms of game-planning and the QB, is the right course. Or that these types of performances are going to stand-up against the likes of the Pats/Texans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HamSandwhich Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Like I said: And also the line was only +4.5 for the Bills. We just gave up 100 points in two games and the Cards were 4-1 and playing at home. I don't think I'm the only one who thought they were soft. That's a pretty meek line for a team with an 8-game winning streak at home. Would it be better if I didn't call the Arizona Cardinals inferior? Would that help this argument? Would it be better to just say we handed them the ball in field goal range in the dying seconds of the game and that they lost it for themselves? If he hits that 38-yarder, we're not having this discussion. We STOLE a game, let's stop pretending this was some type of quality show of power on our end. Who in heck cares what Vegas says??!??!?! You are really grasping at straws here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobobonators Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Nobody says the Dolphins and Eagles are gold standards but all of those teams have winning records in games they didn't play the Cardinals. In such games those teams are a combined 13-7. That's a .650 winning percentage which is pretty good in the NFL. So when those clubs play other teams they generally win yet they all lost to the Cards. Yet the Cards are "inferior." And yeah, the Chiefs and Browns are bad - but now we're not giving credit to the Bills for beating teams they should? Isn't that what you want from your team? Most people think Cincy is going to compete for a playoff spot and they just lost to those same Browns. The Ravens struggled mightily with the Chiefs two weeks ago. This is the NFL, not the NCAA, no win is automatic. Not sure why I'm trying to talk sense to you, you clearly have an agenda so I guess I'll let you get back to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Like I said: And also the line was only +4.5 for the Bills. We just gave up 100 points in two games and the Cards were 4-1 and playing at home. I don't think I'm the only one who thought they were soft. That's a pretty meek line for a team with an 8-game winning streak at home. Would it be better if I didn't call the Arizona Cardinals inferior? Would that help this argument? Would it be better to just say we handed them the ball in field goal range in the dying seconds of the game and that they lost it for themselves? If he hits that 38-yarder, we're not having this discussion. We STOLE a game, let's stop pretending this was some type of quality show of power on our end. So you're arguement is based on Vegas lines? I take it you lost money betting on the Cards then. Sorry. But, yeah, the Bills tried to screw the game in the end. But, why do they not get any credit for being in the lead in the 4th quarter? guess what... they actually had to score throughout the game to be in that situation. Shocking. What about in the 3rd quarter after the Cards scored to go up 13-9; and the Bills answered with an 80 play TD drive to take the lead? What about Byrd's 2ints? I guess he was lucky. Funny, how its all about the Bills just being lucky and never actually doing something good to get a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinnearlysghost88 Posted October 15, 2012 Author Share Posted October 15, 2012 Who in heck cares what Vegas says??!??!?! You are really grasping at straws here... Who cares what Vegas says? Really? I would say the casinos that stand to gain or lose millions of dollars on any given Sunday. These numbers aren't arbitrary. And I wasn't grasping at straws. Comments were made saying what makes you think the Cardinals are an inferior team and I posited that Vegas odds predicted this game to be close. If the Cardinals were really the world-beaters that people are making them out to be, it would've been a +7-+10.5. Not really straws, just facts. They dont throw s&%t at the wall to see what sticks over in terms of betting lines. And I don't think they saw something in the Bills that made them move the line lower. Right? 100 points in two games? So they must have seen something negative in the Cardinals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 Funny, how its all about the Bills just being lucky and never actually doing something good to get a win. I have to say, it did make me feel better about the win yesterday when I found out Carrington partially blocked the FG attempt and it wasn't just a shank from Feely. I'd much rather win due to a Bill making a play than to an opponent just F'in up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 I have to say, it did make me feel better about the win yesterday when I found out Carrington partially blocked the FG attempt and it wasn't just a shank from Feely. I'd much rather win due to a Bill making a play than to an opponent just F'in up. Excellent point, as well. The Bills were lucky, yeah. But, they also made some plays and beat a good team. Carrington's tip of the ball was huge!! Just as were Byrd's ints and Spiller's play. The Bills finally played a full game with some intensity and won! and yet people still wanna dump all over the game. I just don't get it. All I can figure is people would rather be right than watch the Bills win. And too many people have declared the Bills losers and Fitz blows. So, by all means, they have to find fault any way they can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abbottroadwarrior Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 But, yeah, the Bills tried to screw the game in the end. But, why do they not get any credit for being in the lead in the 4th quarter? guess what... they actually had to score throughout the game to be in that situation. Shocking. What about in the 3rd quarter after the Cards scored to go up 13-9; and the Bills answered with an 80 play TD drive to take the lead? What about Byrd's 2ints? I guess he was lucky. I agree with all of this. I expected the Bills to lose yesterday, but thankfully it looks like they have made some adjustments. I was especially pleased with the defensive line. It definitely helped facing one of the more porous o-lines in the game, but if nothing else it was a confidence booster. They took advantage of an opponent's weakness and that's what I hope they do on a consistent basis. As aforementioned, the performances of Spiller and Byrd stand out to me, as well as Mario Williams. I can't blame some people for being skeptical though because I am too at this point. Like President Reagan said, "trust, but verify." I liked the positives that I saw out of the Bills but I still saw the boneheaded playcalling on offense and the lack of execution by Fitzpatrick that leaves me less-than-optimistic about the upcoming schedule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted October 15, 2012 Share Posted October 15, 2012 I agree. The game was by no means ideal. But, after 2 embarassingly horrible losses, the team needed to stop the trainwreck. They did that. They played hard and got a road win against a good team. It wasn't pretty. But, it should give them a little confidence. And, with luck, be a key game in turning this season around! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts