Pitta Posted March 26, 2014 Author Share Posted March 26, 2014 Yes, because if there's ever a franchise that deserves the benefit of the doubt, it's the Buffalo Bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Yes, because if there's ever a franchise that deserves the benefit of the doubt, it's the Buffalo Bills. Ok. We get it. You don't like the Bills. The Browns message board is over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I think Pitta falls into the category that nothing will be good enough. Losing Pettine was a bad deal for Buffalo, and possibly a worse deal for Pettine depending on how the issues with Cleveland fall. However, they didn't have much of a choice in the matter. Pettine took his guys with him. Pettine didn't run a traditional 3-4, so the argument about getting a 3-4 guy doesn't really add up. We have no nose tackle, Mario doesn't want to play OLB, and I'd hate to see him in coverage. The Bills did the 3-4 experiment a couple of years ago, and failed miserably. No, I don't want a 3-4 guy. Pettine wasn't a 3-4 guy, what made Pettines scheme special was the exotic blitz that he drew up. We have 4-3 personnel. Switching to a true 3-4 would require completely revamping the defense, again. I just don't see what the problem is. Agreed Agreed too. I don't think things will be changing nearly as much as some would think. Hopefully we improve on last year's success at least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Changing schemes on a yearly basis sounds like a good recipe for success, as evidenced by the recent history of the franchise. Most good teams change schemes on every defensive series. What do you think of them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealityCheck Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Again, the Bills needed to bring in an experienced DC. Who was available in late January after the Browns finally wrapped up their dissertation. Who was available like that and you feel is a better DC than Schwartz AND runs a base 3-4? It doesn't matter what the heck the guy runs, as long as he runs it well. With the amount of sub-packages used anymore, the base doesn't mean as much as it used to. Also, Pettine didn't really run a base 3-4 from what I could tell - it was the most hybrid D I've seen. So unless someone comes in with the same scheme, not going to be the same. BTW Lawson and Hughes were not two of the defense's best performers last year. They did well in their roles. But let's look at the 3 voted to the PB and Kiko. You don't cater your scheme to two role players. But, I'm sure you didn't bother reading any of this, right? If you read anything, read this: Nickel & diming: How subpackages have become the new base defense in the NFL http://www.sbnation....ers-nickel-dime Thanks for that link. That is a great article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Yes, because if there's ever a franchise that deserves the benefit of the doubt, it's the Buffalo Bills. Can you explain the benefits to the team with and without your doubt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I'm gonna say that we are better with Schwartz. And for the first time since Ted Cottrell, we will stop the run. Who won't be happy with that? Oh and the Schwartz will be leaving for another HC job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Lightning Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Yes, because if there's ever a franchise that deserves the benefit of the doubt, it's the Buffalo Bills. You could follow the Brownies then. They got your man-crush coach. For as much improvement as the D made last year they still couldn't get off the field when it mattered. 3rd and 17? No problem, they'd give it up. The D would have changed anyway. They just gave up too much in the run game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dragonborn10 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Hey to all you posters that are blasting other posters about complaining about the scheme switch is a big deal, perhaps it is because we have listened to coaches tell the fans the reason they suck against the run is that they aren't getting to where they are supposed to be. They love to use the term fits. They preach all year about getting better as if they are still learnign the new defense and then if they actually don't make a change the coaches state how far ahead they are in year two in OTA's and training camp. So perhaps you could cut some people a break. And if you want proof changing schemes often is bad, two words. Torell Troup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Hey to all you posters that are blasting other posters about complaining about the scheme switch is a big deal, perhaps it is because we have listened to coaches tell the fans the reason they suck against the run is that they aren't getting to where they are supposed to be. They love to use the term fits. They preach all year about getting better as if they are still learnign the new defense and then if they actually don't make a change the coaches state how far ahead they are in year two in OTA's and training camp. So perhaps you could cut some people a break. And if you want proof changing schemes often is bad, two words. Torell Troup. Easy man. Today should be a little less hostile here. If you are referring to anything I've posted I accept your point. But I also claim the right to believe that another part of the reason we haven't been able to stop the run is the same coaches involved. I am willing to give Schwartz a chance as he has done that in the past. I also think that when he is successeful in Buffalo in year one in stopping the run and raising our D overall he will likely be gone the following year. Tough but I'll deal with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bills Fan of St Augustine Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Good - maybe now we can stop the friggin run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pitta Posted March 26, 2014 Author Share Posted March 26, 2014 I'm gonna say that we are better with Schwartz. And for the first time since Ted Cottrell, we will stop the run. Who won't be happy with that? Oh and the Schwartz will be leaving for another HC job. What are you basing this on? Here's a tip: go look up the Titans' defensive rankings during Schwartz's tenure sans Albert Haynesworth, then delete your post and try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 http://blogs.canoe.c...3-lbs-and-more/ 3-4 4-3 3-4 4-3 new coordinator new coach, it's dizzying! Can we just get some damn continuity around here! Loved how some on here were saying we have know idea what D Schwartz is going to run, even though he has only ever run a 43. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CSBill Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) BB, I hope your first two picks are prophetic, that would be a great first two days of the draft: 1. RT Jake Mathews 6'5" 308 Tex A&M 2. WR Allen Robinson 6'3" 220 Penn St. Edited March 26, 2014 by CSBill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Yawn. Haven't we already been over this in a 38 page thread when Schwartz was hired? Here's the best anti-troll medicine on this issue from the one and only Kelly the (fair and balanced) Dog: "So let me get this straight, we lined up Mario, Kyle, Dareus and Branch on run downs, and replaced Branch with Jerry Hughes on passing downs where 99% of the time he lined up on the LOS and rushed the passer at the snap like a bat outta hell. We started and played three LBs almost every play, except when we played two with an extra DB, including Kiko in the middle, usually Lawson and either Moats or Bradham on the other OLB positions, but we're a 3-4 and OMG we're screwed with a 4-3 guy coming in?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) Loved how some on here were saying we have know idea what D Schwartz is going to run, even though he has only ever run a 43. To your point, I think there is a case to be made that it's more like: "We don't know quite what 4-3 Schwartz wants to run with his personnel" You can do some riffs off the base. In particular, we have a record of Schwartz using the "Wide 9". There is a really good article here back before FA that talks about how the defense would fit: http://forgedinbuffa...wide-9-defense/ The crux of the article is this: even not running a pure Wide 9, we have players to make it work. http://forgedinbuffa...ase-Front-1.jpg Mario and Kyle Williams look like they would be lining up like a standard 4-3. It's pretty much exactly what they were doing last year: Kyle hitting the 3-technique (the gap between guard and tackle) while Mario lines up the edge of the LT. For the RDE, you bring a speed rusher by running around the TE (or extra wide on the RT, and thus drawing him out of position on the line.)Dareus has the flexibility to play one or two gaps, and I can see them adjusting where he hits based on the play at hand. Of course, this has the big weakness in that you need a MLB who is just amazing at defending the run. Coverage is the lowest priority, because he is charging the line on every play to plug in two gaps the running back might hit. To me, that sounds exactly like Brandon Spikes. The point being, you can find ways to criticize the decision by showing the research on possible schemes, critique whether a player is a good fit and engage in interesting debate OR, you can simply B word and moan while dismissing people's points out of hand and not bothering to pay attention to what they say. Edited March 26, 2014 by Whitewalker Merriman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterpan Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 Sure. I want a 4-3 coach to run a 3-4 he possibly knows absolutely nothing about. Why? Cause that'll give us fans something to B word about for another decade or so. Oh, wait. We'll find something else I'm sure. I think the point is - if you are a 3-4 team hire a 3-4 coach, and vica versa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Linen Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 What are you basing this on? Here's a tip: go look up the Titans' defensive rankings during Schwartz's tenure sans Albert Haynesworth, then delete your post and try again. You hope we don't play good on defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 I think Pitta falls into the category that nothing will be good enough. Losing Pettine was a bad deal for Buffalo, and possibly a worse deal for Pettine depending on how the issues with Cleveland fall. However, they didn't have much of a choice in the matter. Pettine took his guys with him. Pettine didn't run a traditional 3-4, so the argument about getting a 3-4 guy doesn't really add up. We have no nose tackle, Mario doesn't want to play OLB, and I'd hate to see him in coverage. The Bills did the 3-4 experiment a couple of years ago, and failed miserably. No, I don't want a 3-4 guy. Pettine wasn't a 3-4 guy, what made Pettines scheme special was the exotic blitz that he drew up. We have 4-3 personnel. Switching to a true 3-4 would require completely revamping the defense, again. I just don't see what the problem is. I agree there is no problem. The Bills appear to be playing to the strength of their personnel. Losing Byrd was tough but they still have a very strong backfield. The front four are very solid. LB'ing was the issue last year as the Bills continued to be weak against the run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted March 26, 2014 Share Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) Ok. We get it. You don't like the Bills. The Browns message board is over there. They are talking about the same thing, just switch Pettine's name for Horton and Schwartz's for Pettine. What are you basing this on? Here's a tip: go look up the Titans' defensive rankings during Schwartz's tenure sans Albert Haynesworth, then delete your post and try again.Thanks for the tip - it would be helpful if I was a Titans fan and it was the year 2001. I don't know who is the better DC, which isn't what this thread is about anyway I don't think. But the only way to compare the two accurately would be to see the results of them coaching the same players. I wish we had a way to do that -about 6 months from now! Edited March 26, 2014 by YoloinOhio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts