Livinginthepast Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Do you think maybe we could do the occasional "gadget play" if your want to call it that. Maybe a reverse? Do we not have the personnel for at least something non vanilla? Why not get Watkins the ball on a reverse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Watkins was wide open on all four of his targets. Those were probably the only times he was open against the Jets secondary all day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsherman12 Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) The biggest problem I thought was how poorly the offensive played right after some of those turnovers. They had great field position in the first half and settled for too many punts and field goals. Edited October 26, 2014 by rsherman12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big C Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 The biggest problem I thought was how poorly the offensive played off of those turnovers. They had great field position in the first half and settled for two many punts and field goals. When your average field position for the whole game is roughly midfield, you ought to score more. It's crazy to have to say this when we put up by far our biggest total of the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BackInDaDay Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Do you think maybe we could do the occasional "gadget play" if your want to call it that. Maybe a reverse? Do we not have the personnel for at least something non vanilla? Why not get Watkins the ball on a reverse? the Jets D is like ours, in that we both like to penetrate, and force O-lines to adjust their blocking schemes - it begins with the DTs, but it ends with DEs. running deep hand-offs, and any play that takes more than a couple beats to develop, has a good chance of getting blown up. you beat us going north and south, or by forcing our outside second level guys to chase guys across the middle - in order to get something into the vacuum. but you're on the right track - today, we chose to not even use play-action to deceive the D.. baffling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 (edited) Sure. It could be. The game was pretty much over. We could work on our run game, while preserving the victory. Why are you mad that Hackett didn't call pass plays because he wasn't confident that they could execute, but are upset with him that he was confident in our run game? Or is this the magical hindsight and double standard combo grasping at straws? You should have tried a couple of more cliches in that last sentence. They were "working on the run game" when they were only up by seven. Did you like the last drive of the first half? You know the drive that gave the Jets a field goal. The reason the Jets were still in it through the third quarter is Hackett's play calling. The Jets defensive weakness is their secondary. You have to exploit that, not avoid it. Woods and Watkins were "college open" on some of those catches. You don't go away from what's working until they stop you. Edited October 26, 2014 by chris heff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 You should have tried a couple of more cliches in that last sentence. They were "working on the run game" when they were only up by seven. Did you like the last drive of the first half? You know the drive that gave the Jets a field goal. The reason the Jets were still in it through the third quarter is Hackett's play calling. The Jets defensive weakness is their secondary. You have to exploit that, not avoid it. Woods and Watkins were "college open" on some of those catches. You don't go away from what's working until they stop you. Exactly. Crucial mistakes like that are the reason we lost by 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwalter Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 and zero turnovers. coincidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Exactly. Crucial mistakes like that are the reason we lost by 20. Only because the Jets offence is so incredibly inept, not because the Bills offense is so awesome. and zero turnovers. coincidence? All those three and outs don't provide a lot of opportunity for turnovers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I was bashing Hackett during the game. But is there any chance he knew exactly how bad the Jets offense would match up against our D so he went even more conservative than even normal? I will say, no turnovers is huge. I still think we need more creativity, but we won by 20..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I was bashing Hackett during the game. But is there any chance he knew exactly how bad the Jets offense would match up against our D so he went even more conservative than even normal? I will say, no turnovers is huge. I still think we need more creativity, but we won by 20..... I agree. I was terrified a 3rd Qtr turnover would swing momentum back. I expected us to come out gung ho passing up a storm to exploit the weak DB's but after all their turnovers we didn't need to do this. I think Jacket was ready to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BackInDaDay Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 I was bashing Hackett during the game. But is there any chance he knew exactly how bad the Jets offense would match up against our D so he went even more conservative than even normal? I will say, no turnovers is huge. I still think we need more creativity, but we won by 20..... assuming the D will bail out the O, is a helluva way to prepare.. but with no evidence of an actual offensive gameplan, your theory is as valid as any Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Hackett is to blame for Vick running 70 something yards too. Lets put the blame where it belongs!! Hackett gets way too much of the blame, he's a scapegoat for every problem on offense and has become a sort of rallying cry for knee-jerk reactions. Seriously, read the game day thread. Cordy Glenn and Urbik whiff on their blocks? "Stupid Hackett!!!" It's ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Hackett is to blame for Vick running 70 something yards too. Lets put the blame where it belongs!! But Schwartz adjusted at half time. Hackett did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BackInDaDay Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Hackett is to blame for Vick running 70 something yards too. Lets put the blame where it belongs!! no, Hackett is to blame for not having a plan that reacts to how the Jets defend what he wants to do.. and coming into a game with a defense whose strength is their D line, and whose weakness is it's secondary - Hackett's plan should have been protect the QB and take advantage of their coverages.. that's where he starts, and then works from there.. test them and be ready to adapt. this is basic Offense 101.. attack how you want, with who you want, and be prepared for how you'll be defended. Schwarz had a major brain fart versus NE, and Hackett had one here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 But Schwartz adjusted at half time. Hackett did not. Really? I seem to remember two passing TD's in the second half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Really? I seem to remember two passing TD's in the second half. I concur. I am hardly a Hackpologist, but the conservative gameplan made sense there. Let the Jests shoot themselves in the feet repeatedly and bear the fruits of their labor. That said, they did take shots down the field as evidenced by the three deep targets to SWatkins, which led to 14 points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YoloinOhio Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 @ESPNStatsInfo: Kyle Orton: 1st QB to finish with 10 or fewer completions and 4 or more TD passes since Bubby Brister (1990 Steelers against Browns) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flomoe Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Amazing field position from the defense is one of the reasons why they ran the ball. 20 points off of turnovers created by the defense. 20 points off how many turnovers? 6, 7? What was the average drive start on those? The 30 of theirs? Absolutely pathetic!!! Run up the middle on first and second down against one of the better run defenses isn't very good coaching. Good teams with good coaching actually try to score in those situations. Marrone and Hackett need to go before the end of this season ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris heff Posted October 26, 2014 Share Posted October 26, 2014 Really? I seem to remember two passing TD's in the second half. I don't want to argue with other Bills fans after a win. You guys are right Hackett is the second coming of Bill Walsh. Running on every first down is genius, play action is over rated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts