Bills All 22

[K-9]

If only we had PFF's 39th ranked run-blocking guard, we would have dominated the run game on Sunday.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[The Big Cat]

Not true. The holes were created on the right side of the line. They barely even ran behind LG after the first quarter, from my vantage point, and when they did, the holes weren't there at all. There was very little second-level blocking the entire game (by either guard). The weak LG play seemed to obviously affect the playcalling. Sure Spiller should've been more effective - but that's correctable. What's not correctable is the gaping hole in the left side of the line.

 

That's not the point. You tried to contend that we ran poorly because of our LG. That's false. We could have run very well in spite of our LG.

[eball]

Your "facts"? No, you win the argument eball. The Bills' left guard situation couldn't be better and won't affect them in games this season. They ran the ball amazingly well on Sunday. Congrats on yet another victory!

 

It's hard to have an intelligent discussion with someone who only wants to see one side of the story. I didn't say Colin Brown was excellent, or even adequate. I simply pointed out that despite his "disastrous" play there's no evidence the LG situation was responsible for the loss Sunday.

 

But carry on, by all means, and continue to insult me for not wanting to play the doom and gloom game.

[Cash]

I can say that EJ was hardly touched on his 27 dropbacks -- and pass protection was our former LG's forte, not run blocking. We've also seen from the All-22 footage that CJ had a bad game reading his lanes, and Freddy ran just fine.

 

So there's that.

 

And we've also seen from the same reviews of the All-22 footage that Colin Brown was universally rated as atrocious, in both the run and pass. Do you really think that 1/5 of your O-line playing terribly makes no difference to offensive success? "But there were no sacks." There were also only 10 throws intended for WRs. Maybe the Bills would've like to throw downfield a little more, but either couldn't call certain plays or didn't have time to throw certain routes because Colin Brown was getting blown up? Maybe with a better LG, Marrone has more confidence in his short-yardage formation and goes for that 4th-and-1 at midfield and/or converts a few of those failed 3rd-and-shorts on the ground? One more scoring drive may have been enough to win the game for the Bills. Sometimes all it takes is one more 3rd-down conversion to make the difference between a punt and a score. How can you possibly say with certainty that Colin Brown's crappy play didn't cost us a single first down?

 

All of that tells me the Bills are right, because "disastrous" play by their LG resulted in zero sacks and they still ran for over 4 yds a carry if I'm not mistaken -- with CJ having a self-admitted off day.

 

Yes, every move a right one! 286 yards of total offense is an unqualified success. The Bills continue to make the right move again and again! /sarcasm

 

Seriously though, I obviously can't convince you of anything, and I don't even specifically believe that replacing Colin Brown with an average or better LG would have swung the outcome in the Bills' favor. But your religious insistence that there's no way there was any impact is puzzling. How hard is it to admit that having a really bad player play every snap on offense is bad for your offense? And that, in a game where your offense was really bad overall (granted, with rare flashes of brilliance), that replacing the bad player with an average (or good!) player would help? And that, even if it's only a small help, because it's not a very important position, it could have been the difference in an extremely close game?

 

The bottom line is that the Bills' offense was terrible in this game. You can't say that they succeeded in spite of a terrible player. So instead you come up with this insane logic that because Spiller had a bad day, the run blocking couldn't have been a problem. And because Manuel wasn't sacked, the pass blocking couldn't have been a problem either. That is bananas.

[BillnutinHouston]

I asked this in another thread but I think it bears repeating.

 

Who remembers Spiller saying last year that he needed to learn to slow down, be patient and find his holes? In my estimation, he just needs to re-learn that lesson this year and he'll be fine. On Sunday he was almost TOO quick to the line and just wasn't trusting the OL enough.

 

Glad to see my observation was substantiated by Spiller's own comments yesterday.

[The Big Cat]

And we've also seen from the same reviews of the All-22 footage that Colin Brown was universally rated as atrocious, in both the run and pass. Do you really think that 1/5 of your O-line playing terribly makes no difference to offensive success? "But there were no sacks." There were also only 10 throws intended for WRs. Maybe the Bills would've like to throw downfield a little more, but either couldn't call certain plays or didn't have time to throw certain routes because Colin Brown was getting blown up? Maybe with a better LG, Marrone has more confidence in his short-yardage formation and goes for that 4th-and-1 at midfield and/or converts a few of those failed 3rd-and-shorts on the ground? One more scoring drive may have been enough to win the game for the Bills. Sometimes all it takes is one more 3rd-down conversion to make the difference between a punt and a score. How can you possibly say with certainty that Colin Brown's crappy play didn't cost us a single first down?

 

 

 

Yes, every move a right one! 286 yards of total offense is an unqualified success. The Bills continue to make the right move again and again! /sarcasm

 

Seriously though, I obviously can't convince you of anything, and I don't even specifically believe that replacing Colin Brown with an average or better LG would have swung the outcome in the Bills' favor. But your religious insistence that there's no way there was any impact is puzzling. How hard is it to admit that having a really bad player play every snap on offense is bad for your offense? And that, in a game where your offense was really bad overall (granted, with rare flashes of brilliance), that replacing the bad player with an average (or good!) player would help? And that, even if it's only a small help, because it's not a very important position, it could have been the difference in an extremely close game?

 

The bottom line is that the Bills' offense was terrible in this game. You can't say that they succeeded in spite of a terrible player. So instead you come up with this insane logic that because Spiller had a bad day, the run blocking couldn't have been a problem. And because Manuel wasn't sacked, the pass blocking couldn't have been a problem either. That is bananas.

 

And again, you're missing the point.

 

Colin Brown played terribly: on this we all agree.

 

The offense couldn't find its rhythm: on this we all agree.

 

However, in this case, correlation most certainly does not equal causation. Between the drops, the penalties, and CJ reverting to his rookie self, there were many factors contributing to the offense's lackluster performance that would have likewise set them back, even if we had a genetically engineered Franken-guard playing in Brown's place.

Edited September 12, 2013 by The Big Cat

[eball]

And we've also seen from the same reviews of the All-22 footage that Colin Brown was universally rated as atrocious, in both the run and pass. Do you really think that 1/5 of your O-line playing terribly makes no difference to offensive success? "But there were no sacks." There were also only 10 throws intended for WRs. Maybe the Bills would've like to throw downfield a little more, but either couldn't call certain plays or didn't have time to throw certain routes because Colin Brown was getting blown up? Maybe with a better LG, Marrone has more confidence in his short-yardage formation and goes for that 4th-and-1 at midfield and/or converts a few of those failed 3rd-and-shorts on the ground? One more scoring drive may have been enough to win the game for the Bills. Sometimes all it takes is one more 3rd-down conversion to make the difference between a punt and a score. How can you possibly say with certainty that Colin Brown's crappy play didn't cost us a single first down?

 

 

 

Yes, every move a right one! 286 yards of total offense is an unqualified success. The Bills continue to make the right move again and again! /sarcasm

 

Seriously though, I obviously can't convince you of anything, and I don't even specifically believe that replacing Colin Brown with an average or better LG would have swung the outcome in the Bills' favor. But your religious insistence that there's no way there was any impact is puzzling. How hard is it to admit that having a really bad player play every snap on offense is bad for your offense? And that, in a game where your offense was really bad overall (granted, with rare flashes of brilliance), that replacing the bad player with an average (or good!) player would help? And that, even if it's only a small help, because it's not a very important position, it could have been the difference in an extremely close game?

 

The bottom line is that the Bills' offense was terrible in this game. You can't say that they succeeded in spite of a terrible player. So instead you come up with this insane logic that because Spiller had a bad day, the run blocking couldn't have been a problem. And because Manuel wasn't sacked, the pass blocking couldn't have been a problem either. That is bananas.

 

You've attributed statements and philosophies to me that are not accurate, and that's all I can really say in response to a post like this. I have merely pointed out facts that suggest Colin Brown's terrible play didn't appear to single-handedly sink the Bills' ship Sunday -- which by extension suggests the Bills' decision not to invest Levitre-money at the position may not be as bad a move as some repeatedly presume. I didn't say Brown was good -- or even adequate -- and I didn't say I wouldn't like a better LG.

[Coach Tuesday]

That's not the point. You tried to contend that we ran poorly because of our LG. That's false. We could have run very well in spite of our LG.

 

Actually, nowhere did I try to contend that. If I did, I certainly misspoke, but I don't think I made that point anywhere.

[Dibs]

Pessimist: 'Topic A' was absolutely terrible and should never have been done. It's horrendous!

 

Moderate: Actually, 'Topic A' wasn't as horrible as you state. All things considered (shows data, facts and reasonable argument), it was pretty decent.

 

Pessimist: Yeah, there is absolutely nothing wrong with 'Topic A'. You're 100% correct! Our 'Topic A' is first class and the best in the league. Good Lord, be realistic!

 

Moderate: AAAARRRRGGGGHHHH!!!!

 

 

 

 

Optimist: <chuckle>

Edited September 12, 2013 by Dibs

[26CornerBlitz]

The Coaches or All-22 Film is available for week two.

[26CornerBlitz]

Winning plays you may have missed: Week 2: http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-2/Winning-plays-you-may-have-missed-Week-2/44607ba3-2e25-4901-a8eb-90f2707e3f54

[Fan in Chicago]

Winning plays you may have missed: Week 2: http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-2/Winning-plays-you-may-have-missed-Week-2/44607ba3-2e25-4901-a8eb-90f2707e3f54

 

Very good. Looks like players on both sides of the ball are playing well and smart footboall. Credit the coaching.

Edited September 18, 2013 by Fan in Chicago

[26CornerBlitz]

Upon Further Review: Bills vs Panthers: http://www.wgr550.com/two-bills-drive/17320016

 

It was a hallmark day for the Buffalo Bills, signaling that the new era had begun with their flashy new rookie quarterback leading them to a come-from-behind victory over the Carolina Panthers. Before we turn the page on the victory over the Panthers to the upcoming contest against the New York Jets, first is a look at how each individual that took an offensive or defensive snap fared during Week 2.

 

The big names of the Bills certainly came to play in the statistical sense, but how did they do on a play-to-play basis that isn't reflected in the commonly accepted categories?

 

Every week, with the help of the All-22 film available through NFL.com's Game Rewind package, WGR will provide the standouts, the duds and everything in between from the game that was.

[Coach Tuesday]

 

Winning plays you may have missed: Week 2: http://www.buffalobi...eb-90f2707e3f54

 

Wow - if that doesn't just prove that a pass rush makes a world of difference. Like, the difference between winning and losing. The difference between last year and this year. Keep it up boys!

[PromoTheRobot]

There is a tendency to be black and white about the Bills: that if we don't win the entire team must be the worst in the NFL. But I always thought we had talent but our coaching before didn't make proper use of it.

 

PTR

Edited September 18, 2013 by PromoTheRobot

[eball]

There is a tendency to be black and white about the Bills: that if we don't win the entire team must be the worst in the NFL. But I always thought we had talent but our coaching before didn't make proper use of it.

 

PTR

 

<cough> Wanny <cough>

[Dorkington]

This thread is going to be my favorite thread of the season.

[The Big Cat]

Upon Further Review: Bills vs Panthers: http://www.wgr550.co...-drive/17320016

 

It was a hallmark day for the Buffalo Bills, signaling that the new era had begun with their flashy new rookie quarterback leading them to a come-from-behind victory over the Carolina Panthers. Before we turn the page on the victory over the Panthers to the upcoming contest against the New York Jets, first is a look at how each individual that took an offensive or defensive snap fared during Week 2.

 

The big names of the Bills certainly came to play in the statistical sense, but how did they do on a play-to-play basis that isn't reflected in the commonly accepted categories?

 

Every week, with the help of the All-22 film available through NFL.com's Game Rewind package, WGR will provide the standouts, the duds and everything in between from the game that was.

 

Okay, another TIME OUT!!

 

Joe B deserves some serious !@#$ing props for this.

 

Following him on Twitter, I know he started watching film yesterday around 3, finished around 9, then this was posted at 1 a.m.

 

THAT'S mother !@#$ing journalism, fellas. Tim Graham, take some !@#$ing notes.

 

JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B! JOE B!

[San Jose Bills Fan]

There is a tendency to be black and white about the Bills: that if we don't win the entire team must be the worst in the NFL. But I always thought we had talent but our coaching before didn't make proper use of it.

 

PTR

 

As I've stated often here, Nix was a decent GM as far as acquiring talent (all GMs have hits and misses) however his biggest failings were the two most important things a GM does:

 

1) Hiring a good Head Coach

2) Getting a good QB.

[Dan]

As I've stated often here, Nix was a decent GM as far as acquiring talent (all GMs have hits and misses) however his biggest failings were the two most important things a GM does:

 

1) Hiring a good Head Coach

2) Getting a good QB.

I'm not disagreeing, but asking... could this have been part of Nix's long term plan he continually referred to? (Not so much the HC. Let's face it, he was probably stuck with Gailey as no one else seemed to want the job. Although I still think he could have done better on the coaching front.)

 

But, with regards to the QB, is it better to build the line up, have a decent WR and stud RB, then just add a rookie QB. That way, he's being added to a team that's set up and ready to succeed.

 

All too often, it seems teams draft a top notch QB prospect but have no line to protect him or no weapons. The result is he gets beat up and struggles, and by the time you get a line in place he's shell-shocked, lost his confidence and developed bad habits. So, now you're stuck starting all over again.

 

Another way to look at it: Imagine had we drafted EJ In 2010, how would he look without our current line in front of him? Without CJ running all over the place?

 

So, is it possible Nix did have a plan for the QB position, but he wanted to make sure the team had a solid foundation first?

Edited September 19, 2013 by Dan