Luxy312 Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 it's easy to make Fitzpatrick a scapegoat and pretend that he's the only reason this team is losing games. He's not. The defense has been atrocious, in particular against the run. They routinely can't stop anyone more this year than last. The Mario Williams experiment has been a monumental bust. Our pass defense isn't any better than it was last year. Penalties were ridiculously in favor of the Patriots though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 12, 2012 Author Share Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) my point is that you change the two games you noted and the Bills are 5-4 but the Pats would be 8-1 (still 3 games ahead) if you change the 2 games I noted. Both the Patriots and the Bills are deserving of their current records. That's not the point. Here, I'll type it out. The point is this: Every NFL game consists of scores of plays. Take the game yesterday -- there were about 140 offensive plays by each team, and throw a dozen more or so in there for special teams plays. Some games have less, but not by that much. In general, there are somewhere around 125-150 plays per game. If you take the low end (125), and we've now played 9 games, that's around 1125 plays so far this year. Over one thousand plays during the season so far, and if just two—two!—had turned out just a wee bit different, that would be the difference right now between first place and last place. Despite the fact that our defense has been historically bad, despite all the hand-wringing and whining about the play calling, despite all of the injuries, bad bounces, and !@#$ing Bryan Scott having all day to himself to try and catch a ball dropping right into his hands. No matter how good or bad we have been, or have looked, of all the hundreds of plays that I've wanted to punch my hand through a wall (like every time a defensive end drops into coverage), it's still just amazing to me that altering two tiny little plays at the end of two games could have such a significant and dramatic impact on how we perceive things. Even for a team as ****ty as this one. (And note that these are plays at the end of games, not at the beginning, and thus they wouldn't have had any real downstream impact on the game -- in the game against TEN, stopping the fourth down play wins the game; against the Pats*, getting the touchdown wins the game. The Bryan Scott INT, had he not dropped it, would have changed the outcome of the game in ways that we could not possibly know.) Yes, it's entirely valid to say that one or two plays would have the exact opposite effect—Carrington's block against ARI, for instance, or the two plays you mentioned for NE making them 8-1. People who say "So what? It can happen to anybody, not just us" are missing the point. In a season of thousands and thousands of plays, it's just amazing to me how the way things are perceived can change in dramatic ways just by changing the outcome of one or two. Even though we suck—and we do suck—we are only two tiny little plays away form being tied for first place. Instead, we are mired in the cellar, as usual. That's all. You may all now return to your regularly scheduled team and media bashing. Edited November 12, 2012 by Rubes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanofFredJackson Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 AS EXPECTED THE BUFFALOSE BILLS CHOKED Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 It is even closer than that, viewed in one way: Hasselbeck threw a pic before the final TD, and Wilson dropped it. McCourty did not. Winning and losing can turn on such narrow points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwoz Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 I appreciate your logic and thoughtfulness. There is a lot to digest. However, Im not sure those two plays would have made the Bills a better team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 I appreciate your logic and thoughtfulness. There is a lot to digest. However, Im not sure those two plays would have made the Bills a better team. But, perhaps to belabor the point... those two plays would make the Bills 5-4, and they would be considered a better team.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Cowlings Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 The point is the Bills are closer than most realize. The big problems are the defense and consistently losing the turnover battle. These go hand in hand because the defense never gets stops or turns anyone over, which puts pressure on the offense to take chances. Fix this defense and we've got a wildcard team at worst. This is not an endorsement of Fitz. I'd still like to see him replaced in the offseason. He's reached his ceiling and he's not clutch when it matters most. Really? You don't feel that this was a big year for the organization? For the most part the AFC is at one of its weakest points in the last decade. This year's version of the Pats is one of its weakest teams. Steelers and Ravens are getting older. Teams like Denver and Indy are on the rise. Miami is better than anyone thought. The Bills just keep on being mediocre. There is no direction, and they are banking on Fitz as their leader. How come other teams can turn things around in one or two years and this team is now in an over a decade rebuilding process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwoz Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 But, perhaps to belabor the point... those two plays would make the Bills 5-4, and they would be considered a better team.... Being "considered" a better team and "being" a better team are two different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 Being "considered" a better team and "being" a better team are two different things. ...which actually helps to make my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 ...which actually helps to make my point. Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwoz Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 ...which actually helps to make my point. I don't follow you here. How is being "considered" a better team the same as "being" a better team. Please elaborate. Thx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) I don't follow you here. How is being "considered" a better team the same as "being" a better team. Please elaborate. Thx. I'm not saying they are the same. I'm saying that helps to make my point. To put it briefly, consider: the difference for us between first place and last place is two teeny plays among thousands. With those two plays in our favor, we're in first place. It doesn't make us that much better of a team—a bit more clutch, perhaps, but still monumentally, historically bad on defense—but instead of being an afterthought in the league, people would be talking about us as a big factor in the playoff picture with a real chance of breaking through and winning the AFC East as we now become a divisional power. We wouldn't really be a "better" team. We'd just be "considered" a better team. Just with two little plays going differently. That's all it takes. Edited November 13, 2012 by Rubes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
notwoz Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 I'm not saying they are the same. I'm saying that helps to make my point. To put it briefly, consider: the difference for us between first place and last place is two teeny plays among thousands. With those two plays in our favor, we're in first place. It doesn't make us that much better of a team—a bit more clutch, perhaps, but still monumentally, historically bad on defense—but instead of being an afterthought in the league, people would be talking about us as a big factor in the playoff picture with a real chance of breaking through and winning the AFC East as we now become a divisional power. We wouldn't really be a "better" team. We'd just be "considered" a better team. Just with two little plays going differently. That's all it takes. I see your point, thx for the elaboration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boltuprite Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 (edited) If If's and but's were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas Edited November 13, 2012 by boltuprite Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatsFanNH Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 and the Patriots are a couple of lousy plays away from being 8-1. The debatable last second field goal the Ravens scored that the replacment officials ruled good. The late TD they gave up to Seattle. What's your point? Or worse the total choke by the Pats kicker against AZ or the TD called back in the same game on a phantom Hold on Gronk... but they dont matter you are what your record says you are.. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 The point is the Bills are closer than most realize. Everyone 'gets' the point; it's just a stupid one. Almost every team is 'closer' to being better if you change a few plays around here and there. But in the end you either win or lose the game, and if you keep losing that is who you are. The Bills are no 'closer' to first place than they are to a 1-8 record and the doormat of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 Everyone 'gets' the point; it's just a stupid one. Almost every team is 'closer' to being better if you change a few plays around here and there. But in the end you either win or lose the game, and if you keep losing that is who you are. The Bills are no 'closer' to first place than they are to a 1-8 record and the doormat of the league. I respectfully disagree. That's not the point, and it's not a stupid one. But whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 I respectfully disagree. That's not the point, and it's not a stupid one. But whatever. I think the real point is that you (and everyone else) are sick of rooting for a lousy team. But playing 'if only....' doesn't change the fact that the Bills have a bad FO, medicore coaches, a below-average QB, no LBs, and an underperforming DL and secondary. There are not that close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted November 13, 2012 Share Posted November 13, 2012 You should change your thread to: We are two lousy coaches away from being in first place.....Gailey and Wanny. Chan can't keep Fitz from throwing INT's other than not calling pass plays and Wannaclue can't be on the field tackling guys. I will say that it appears that tackling has slightly improved. Its the containment issue that they need to deal with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 13, 2012 Author Share Posted November 13, 2012 I think the real point is that you (and everyone else) are sick of rooting for a lousy team. But playing 'if only....' doesn't change the fact that the Bills have a bad FO, medicore coaches, a below-average QB, no LBs, and an underperforming DL and secondary. There are not that close. That's not the point I'm trying to make. I don't disagree with you, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts