All-22 of Bills-Jags from Cover1

[BillsFan130]

Thanks for posting, it was a good read.

 

My only slight issue with the All 22 is, It seems very easy in hindsight to break down plays in slow motion and say "this is where the ball is supposed to go", or "this is what the WR/o line needed to do".

 

While all true, I am sure you can make an all 22 for every team and blame the players for lack of execution.

 

I'm sure the Bills leave a lot more plays on the table than most teams, but my point is its very easy to pick 5-10 plays a game where the players should have executed better.

 

Translation: The players weren't good enough, but picking 5-10 plays a game doesn't excuse Dennison either

 

[Call_Of_Ktulu]

48 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

Dave did you go to the link? You say how do I single Tyrod out, see below.

 

From the link.

 

Quote:

Taylor was fooled by the Jaguars on several occasions. This caused him to lock on to specific targets rather than letting the coverage dictate where the ball goes. 

 

Quote:

Not only did Taylor struggle processing coverages, but when plays were open he or his teammates missed opportunities. 

 

Quote:

Another first down play action call that is there, but Taylor fails to take what the defense gives him.

 

Quote:

They gave Taylor the keys to the offense, allowed him to read the defense and make the decisions to run or pass, often referred to as run/pass options.

 

Quote:

Taylor also missed a very nice window on this dig route to WR Kelvin Benjamin.

 

Quote:

On this play, Jones gets some separation, but the ball isn’t thrown accurately enough for Jones to catch it. Instead, he has to wait on the ball and it allows the defender to make a play. Was the defender there early? Sure, but a better pass and that doesn’t even occur.

 

My comment:

This one shows his film study IMO considering it is what Jags and I Quote:(The signals have been the same the entire season.)

. A QB is suppose to study what a D has a been doing in other games, Sure maybe the OC should have seen it but does this QB notice anything to help his OC and offense?. Good film study makes a good QB:

 

Quote:

.On the final drive and possibly Taylor’s last play as a Buffalo Bill, he again misses a pass to the flat versus the very same ‘Palms’ coverage the Jags played earlier in the game on the interception. I find it very difficult to stomach how the offense isn’t seeing the hand signals by the Jags. When the defenders show their palms to the sky it signaled ‘Palms’ coverage (the following play), and when they point to the sky it was Cover 3. The signals have been the same the entire season.

 

Quote:

Taylor’s tendency to hold on to the ball and not pull the trigger left some easy yardage on the field.

 

Quote:

Taylor’s decisions and shortcomings were all evident in the biggest game for the Bills in the last 17 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thats why I posted right after the game that I don't know how McD watches that game film and doesn't come out wanting a new QB. 

 

If Taylor is on this team next season McD will take the heat for Taylor sucking and also making over 16 mil.

[PolishDave]

Just now, xRUSHx said:

Well I am sorry too man, I thought we were having a conversation and I pulled the quotes from the article so you could see what i was seeing.

 

I thought I answered your bold as to why I thought IMO that blame should be on Tyrod for not doing enough film study to notice a tendency the Jags do. Never assume because hey it makes a ___ out of you and me is the assume saying. Have a good day man sorry I got you so mad.

 

Not mad at all bro.  

 

Frustrated from lack of clarity.   

 

It is the one of the weak parts of forums.   Hard to be clear unless you type a full page.  And then nobody wants to read it - TLDR.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I do get sick of seeing Tyrod blamed for things that clearly aren't his fault or that aren't even mostly his fault.  (like the Jacksonville defensive signals)

 

And it does get old seeing the same people keep repeating the same thing post after post thread after thread (even outside of QB threads) about how bad Tyrod is at this and how awful Tyrod is at that.  And he sucks at QB because he can run too fast for an NFL QB.  And he sucks because he can avoid a pash rush longer than any other QB in the NFL.  And he sucks because his mom's fat too.    And he probably doesn't like Polish food.   And he probably eats wings with a knife and fork.  Like at some point you need to quit complaining and just move on eh?

 

 

[xRUSHx]

10 hours ago, LeGOATski said:

Definitely on Taylor.

 

I know it's a playoff game, but this staff expects to be in the playoffs every year. The missteps by the players provide valuable learning opportunities. This is the system they're running. Do it right or you'll be embarrassed in the wild card round. They're not going to change it up for you.

I agree man, good post.

 

With it being a playoff game the game plan is more complex, the players need to step there play but IMO Tyrod missed the boat in his film study. They had practice all week and failed when it was time to do it.

Without execution the team has nothing but when a QB didn't study enough simple plays that could have been a plus turn into a negative.

10 minutes ago, PolishDave said:

 

Not mad at all bro.  

 

Frustrated from lack of clarity.   

 

It is the one of the weak parts of forums.   Hard to be clear unless you type a full page.  And then nobody wants to read it - TLDR.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I do get sick of seeing Tyrod blamed for things that clearly aren't his fault or that aren't even mostly his fault.  (like the Jacksonville defensive signals)

 

And it does get old seeing the same people keep repeating the same thing post after post thread after thread (even outside of QB threads) about how bad Tyrod is at this and how awful Tyrod is at that.  And he sucks at QB because he can run too fast for an NFL QB.  And he sucks because he can avoid a pash rush longer than any other QB in the NFL.  And he sucks because his mom's fat too.    And he probably doesn't like Polish food.   And he probably eats wings with a knife and fork.  Like at some point you need to quit complaining and just move on eh?

 

 

Clarity in here for sure is frustrating.

 

Haha, I am not one to defend him that's for sure. As you are sick of the negative I am sick of the over the top threads of him being compared to the greats of the game for the last few years. 

 

So I will end this on a final note, it is a QB driven league and a teams offense is driven by said QB, when the offense fails to drive I point to the driver. Have a good day man thanks for the convo.

Edited January 11, 2018 by xRUSHx

[PolishDave]

52 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

 Tyrod has played in this offense before.  Dennison was his QB coach in Baltimore.  

 

I don't know this for a fact, but something tells me that the offense Baltimore ran back when Dennison worked with Tyrod there as a QB coach was not the same offense that Dennison ran this year.    I honestly don't know.   My intuition tells me it is extremely unlikely.

 

The one advantage with bringing in Dennison should have been - that he knows Tyrods strengths and weaknesses already.  Therefore he should be better prepared to design an offense that Tyrod can execute well.

 

Obviously that didn't happen.  Is that 100% Tyrod's fault - A reasonable man would have to say not a chance in hell.  Tyrod didn't design this offense.   His previous coaches designed better ones for him than Dennison did.   Hard to argue against that.

4 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

I agree man.

 

With it being a playoff game the game plan is more complex, the players need to step there play but IMO Tyrod missed the boat in his film study. They had practice all week and failed when it was time to do it.

Without execution the team has nothing but when a QB didn't study enough simple plays that could have been a plus turn into a negative.

Haha, I am not one to defend him that's for sure. As you are sick of the negative I am sick of the over the top threads of him being compared to the greats of the game for the last few years. 

 

So I will end this on a final note, it is a QB driven league and a teams offense is driven by said QB, when the offense fails to drive I point to the driver. Have a good day man thanks for the convo.

 

Where are all of these threads comparing Tyrod to the greats of the game?  I must have missed them.

 

Count the number of threads started to praise Tyrod.

Count the number of threads started to bash him.

 

Count the number of posts in other threads unrelated to the quarterbacks where some poster comes in and interjects praise for Tyrod where he doesn't deserve it.

 

Then count the number of posts in other unrelated threads where some poster comes in and interjects blame on Tyrod when the thread isn't even about him.

 

You don't have to count them do you?   You already know how that is going to turn out.   That is my point.

[xRUSHx]

2 hours ago, PolishDave said:

 

 

How is it that you single out Tyrod for this.      Dennison is old enough to be Tyrod's father.   And he is the coach.    What about the QB coach?   What about the head coach?   Why aren't you sharing the blame where it belongs?

 

Tyrod could have noticed it sure.   But friggin nobody did.   And those other guys have WAY more experience than Tyrod breaking down defenses.    You are blaming Tyrod just because you are a hater.   You aren't being objective about it at all.   Realistically it is a complete COACHING fail.    

 

If the coaches come out and say they did notice it and did integrate that into the game plan and Tyrod just ignored it, well then okay - Tyrod's fault.   I didn't hear anyone say that.  Did you?

 

I hate defending Tyrod now because I think he flat out sucked in that game.   You bastards make it impossible to ignore though because of your incessant blame on him for anything and everything that isn't Tom Brady perfect.   WTF man?  WTF?

Looking back at this post sure makes me think you were mad.

 

You called me a few things in this post that I didn't point out but man you sure sounded mad.

17 minutes ago, PolishDave said:

 

I don't know this for a fact, but something tells me that the offense Baltimore ran back when Dennison worked with Tyrod there as a QB coach was not the same offense that Dennison ran this year.    I honestly don't know.   My intuition tells me it is extremely unlikely.

 

The one advantage with bringing in Dennison should have been - that he knows Tyrods strengths and weaknesses already.  Therefore he should be better prepared to design an offense that Tyrod can execute well.

 

Obviously that didn't happen.  Is that 100% Tyrod's fault - A reasonable man would have to say not a chance in hell.  Tyrod didn't design this offense.   His previous coaches designed better ones for him than Dennison did.   Hard to argue against that.

 

Where are all of these threads comparing Tyrod to the greats of the game?  I must have missed them.

 

Count the number of threads started to praise Tyrod.

Count the number of threads started to bash him.

 

Count the number of posts in other threads unrelated to the quarterbacks where some poster comes in and interjects praise for Tyrod where he doesn't deserve it.

 

Then count the number of posts in other unrelated threads where some poster comes in and interjects blame on Tyrod when the thread isn't even about him.

 

You don't have to count them do you?   You already know how that is going to turn out.   That is my point.

If you haven't seen the million Tyrod love fest threads I don't know what to tell you. I like to see both sides of a coin but in those threads when something negative would've been posted said poster would get attacked and called names. You still sound mad bro.

Edited January 11, 2018 by xRUSHx

[PolishDave]

12 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

I but IMO Tyrod missed the boat in his film study. 

 

 when a QB didn't study enough

 

Do you think that quarterbacks go off all by themselves and come up with their own way to attack the defense in an upcoming game?

 

If they do that, they are doing that on their own time as an extra effort kind of thing.

 

Since when has it become primarily the quarterback's job to determine how to attack the upcoming defense and what weaknesses the defense has?

 

The coaches and coordinators are supposed to do that.     Maybe the quarterback and backup quarterbacks catch something the coaches miss.   Great.    I really don't think that is primarily an expected skill the quarterback is supposed to be great at.

 

If he is, why they hell have coaches at all?

 

I thought coaches and quarterbacks sat in a room together watching film of the defense trying to identify weaknesses where anyone in the room can speak up and point something out.   And then maybe the coaches and quarterbacks spend extra time on their own in private doing extra analysis trying to catch more things.  

 

Failure to notice ways to attack a defense is the fault of a coach not a player.

[Mat68]

Its tough when you work on plays designed specifically to beat certain coverages.  The kid from Alabama did something to win the game that I have never seen Taylor do.  Cover 2 defense all goes with the inside man to the wide side run a post.  By the book the pass goes to the in the inside man running the post.  A true freshman 18 year old Qb stares down the traditional place the ball should go.  Knowing all well the saftey knows the same thing hes going to catch him cheating and make the pass that theoretically the coverage takes away.  He did it to perfection put the ball on the money and won the game.  Late in the game vs Quarters coverage.  jaguars go to coverage.  Quarters meaning the outside corners and saftey each have the deepest guy in their quarter of  the field.  Taylor's tendency is to throw the ball over the middle short all year.  Thompson outside runs a deep post.  As the Te breaks over the middle both safties stop or slow there depth expecting the pass short.  If Taylor rips it to the post the Bills score a Td.  NFL teams self scout and know their own tendencies I would almost guarantee that play was called multiple times and the post is there.  Taylor never adjusts and the Bills lose the game.

[PolishDave]

6 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

Looking back at this post sure makes me think you were mad.

 

You called me a few things in this post that I didn't point out but man you sure sounded mad.

If you haven't seen the million Tyrod love fest threads I don't know what to tell you. I like to see both sides of a coin but in those threads when something negative would ve posted said poster would get attacked and called names. You still sound mad bro.

 

Oh yeah.  I was mad then.  That was momentary though.   Happens at various times when people post some things.

 

I get over things quickly.   I know better.  It is a forum.

 

Trust me.   I'm not mad.   I would rather laugh or walk away before getting lingering pissed.   

 

I try to practice that emotional intelligence thing I talked about in another thread on here - the one where Shady looked pissed after the game.

Edited January 11, 2018 by PolishDave

[GoBills808]

30 minutes ago, PolishDave said:

 

I do get sick of seeing Tyrod blamed for things that clearly aren't his fault or that aren't even mostly his fault.  (like the Jacksonville defensive signals)

 

Fair point. However, equally frustrating are the people blaming other players for things that ARE Taylor's fault, like someone did earlier in this thread on the O'Leary endzone throw.

[PolishDave]

Just now, GoBills808 said:

Fair point. However, equally frustrating are the people blaming other players for things that ARE Taylor's fault, like someone did earlier in this thread on the O'Leary endzone throw.

 

I guess I don't notice them because I don't hold hatred for Tyrod.   I have no other explanation for why I don't notice them.  

 

Well, I guess I have seen some praise here and there that was over the top, but it wasn't people volunteering that praise unprovoked day after day thread after thread post after post.

 

It was one or two guys saying it and then moving on.

 

The negative stuff however is day after day, thread after thread, post after post - and it's about a guy who is very, very likely heading out the door.   Get me?

 

And the negative stuff gets so over the top and so overdone that it provokes people to come out and defend against it - which then makes it look like everyone loves the guy - which they don't.

[Stank_Nasty]

2 hours ago, PolishDave said:

 

 

How is it that you single out Tyrod for this.      Dennison is old enough to be Tyrod's father.   And he is the coach.    What about the QB coach?   What about the head coach?   Why aren't you sharing the blame where it belongs?

 

Tyrod could have noticed it sure.   But friggin nobody did.   And those other guys have WAY more experience than Tyrod breaking down defenses.    You are blaming Tyrod just because you are a hater.   You aren't being objective about it at all.   Realistically it is a complete COACHING fail.    

 

If the coaches come out and say they did notice it and did integrate that into the game plan and Tyrod just ignored it, well then okay - Tyrod's fault.   I didn't hear anyone say that.  Did you?

 

I hate defending Tyrod now because I think he flat out sucked in that game.   You bastards make it impossible to ignore though because of your incessant blame on him for anything and everything that isn't Tom Brady perfect.   WTF man?  WTF?

he's one of the worst to talk to around here when it comes to being rational about taylor. don't bother with him.....

 

and your last statement is exactly how I feel. I don't even like going to bat for taylor becuz I've been soooo over him for so long now but there are certain people that say the most idiotic things and then I find myself arguing for taylor over and over again. you hit the nail on the head with all of this post.

[Scott7975]

44 minutes ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

Thats why I posted right after the game that I don't know how McD watches that game film and doesn't come out wanting a new QB. 

 

If Taylor is on this team next season McD will take the heat for Taylor sucking and also making over 16 mil.

I think it's been pretty obvious for a while that they intend to find a new QB

[NewEraBills]

48 minutes ago, PolishDave said:

 

I don't know this for a fact, but something tells me that the offense Baltimore ran back when Dennison worked with Tyrod there as a QB coach was not the same offense that Dennison ran this year.    I honestly don't know.   My intuition tells me it is extremely unlikely.

 

The one advantage with bringing in Dennison should have been - that he knows Tyrods strengths and weaknesses already.  Therefore he should be better prepared to design an offense that Tyrod can execute well.

 

 

 

 

 

From my Ravens fans perspective, it's all on Tyrod.  They said when he was there with Dennison his problem wasn't exactly the same problem that we experience in Buffalo where TT is timid but it is indicative of it.  His problem in Baltimore was he took off too much.  He made the one read and took off.  Here, he just seems very timid at times.  I'm not sure what that is or why that is.

 

I'm not into bashing TT.  I've seen him do better than this season. 

Edited January 11, 2018 by NewEraBills

[GunnerBill]

17 minutes ago, PolishDave said:

 

Well, I guess I have seen some praise here and there that was over the top, but it wasn't people volunteering that praise unprovoked day after day thread after thread post after post.

 

PolishDave meet transplant, transplant meet PolishDave.  

[xRUSHx]

10 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

PolishDave meet transplant, transplant meet PolishDave.  

Right on man.

 

I like how I am the bad guy all the time, how dare I say anything bad about the all mighty savior, the great playoff QB that took us single handedly to the playoffs and does no wrong. Never the QBs fault in this passing league, always everyone elses. 3 years running. How dare I have a different opinion.

Edited January 11, 2018 by xRUSHx

[PolishDave]

8 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

PolishDave meet transplant, transplant meet PolishDave.  

 

Ahh yes.  He does go over the top.  I have noticed that.   I honestly don't read most of what he writes because it is usually WAY too long.

 

1 minute ago, xRUSHx said:

 the all mighty savior

 

That guy is here too.   I think he is a Peterman fan. 

 

[xRUSHx]

1 minute ago, PolishDave said:

 

Ahh yes.  He does go over the top.  I have noticed that.   I honestly don't read most of what he writes because it is usually WAY too long.

 

That is why many go over the top on him because of those threads. I guess if you do not read them you wouldn't understand.

 

I agree with you saying it gets frustrating trying to explain in a MB.

[PolishDave]

15 minutes ago, NewEraBills said:

From my Ravens fans perspective, it's all on Tyrod.  They said when he was there with Dennison his problem wasn't exactly the same problem that we experience in Buffalo where TT is timid but it is indicative of it.  His problem in Baltimore was he took off too much.  He made the one read and took off.  Here, he just seems very timid at times.  I'm not sure what that is or why that is.

 

I get what you are saying.

 

I just don't understand how that has anything to do with or relates at all to whether Baltimore ran the same offense then that Buffalo is running now?

[NewEraBills]

3 minutes ago, PolishDave said:

 

I get what you are saying.

 

I just don't understand how that has anything to do with or relates at all to whether Baltimore ran the same offense then that Buffalo is running now?

 

I'd think the concepts that TT picked up then are the same.  I'm just guessing.  Some of the formations are the same (not guessing).  I'd think many of the checks are the same.  Also would think the verbiage is very similar.  But I'm just guessing.

Edited January 11, 2018 by NewEraBills

[boyst]

I still think Dennison is garbage but the game was called well.  But l, still garbage.  I just don't like hjm

 

I saw a lot of cover 3. I didn't recognize it at first because they appeared to show cover/tampa2 then walk the safety up to cover 3, sometimes backing the CB's off.  Taylor has not been able to read a field well, we all know that.  So Dennison still letting Taylor get these plays where he would see the defense shift pre snap was frustrating.

 

That's on Dennison. He needs to coach to his players. Taylor is incapable of adjustments in the field in most situations.  I don't doubt for a minute I can read a defense better than he can, hell, I was doing it the whole game from the stands.

 

What needs to happen is simple. If they're both staying they need a lot of time together. Dennison just doesn't get it and Taylor is incapable. If Dennison stays we will need such a specific type of QB that we will be limited if we can even identify one.  This is a disaster of a scheme and Dennison must go.  Taylor gives us a better chance to win than he does and that's sad!

[PolishDave]

Just now, NewEraBills said:

 

I'd think the concepts that TT picked up then are the same.  I'm just guessing.  Some of the formations are the same (not guessing).  I'd think many of the checks are the same.  Also would think the verbiage is very similar.  But I'm just guessing.

 

Gotcha.  I'm out of likes and thanks for the day.   So I couldn't leave you one.

 

I think I have invested WAAAY too much of my life on this board in the last 24 hours.  Yikes!

 

My god.   What is wrong with me? 

[NewEraBills]

I'll just say this:  I'm not saying Dennison is good or bad.  I've seen TT be better than he was in this offense.  Where the disconnect is I do not know.  All I know is from what I see.  And I see guys open at times.  I see guys not open at times.  I see a QB who's body language has not exuded any confidence since preseason and who has been very timid at times.  That's what I see.  I don't know all of the stuff going on that is playing into that.  I see a coordinator who's had previous dealings with this same guy using similar formations, route concepts.  Don't know if the verbiage is exact, but not sure why it would be different if it's the same coordinator??  I see a guy struggling in something that from just putting the puzzle together in my head, he already has experience with.

[Stank_Nasty]

18 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

Right on man.

 

I like how I am the bad guy all the time, how dare I say anything bad about the all mighty savior, the great playoff QB that took us single handedly to the playoffs and does no wrong. Never the QBs fault in this passing league, always everyone elses. 3 years running. How dare I have a different opinion.

exactly what I was referring to. thanks for this.

 

you live in extremes. and this is honestly how you see it anytime anyone takes up for the guy. you cant talk about him rationally. literally nobody claims the bolded on this board but anytime somebody has called you on your dramatic over the top nonsense about him you go into this worthless diatribe.

 

that being said. i'm waiting with anticipation to see the direction they go with the position this year. its time to turn the page..... its just not nearly the sad story you make it out to be. not even close.

 

EDIT: FTR I get some of it may be sarcasm but at what point, after you literally do it all the time, is it not considered sarcasm anymore? 

Edited January 11, 2018 by Stank_Nasty

[Big Turk]

I would love to see an analysis of QBs(and especially Taylor) by coverages faced...both known and disguised. 

 

For instance it could show long term patterns with various QB who struggle versus different coverage concepts as well as those who struggle with disguised coverages(ie, the D shows one thing pre snap and then changes post snap).

 

I'm sure teams break things down in this manner but I am unsure why we have never seen analysts break down QBs in this manner...it would be pretty helpful to know what they struggle with and excel at...

 

If I had access to the All-22 and enough time I'd do it myself but this would be a massive undertaking.

 

 

 

 

[xRUSHx]

21 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

exactly what I was referring to. thanks for this.

 

you live in extremes. and this is honestly how you see it anytime anyone takes up for the guy. you cant talk about him rationally. literally nobody claims the bolded on this board but anytime somebody has called you on your dramatic over the top nonsense about him you go into this worthless diatribe.

 

that being said. i'm waiting with anticipation to see the direction they go with the position this year. its time to turn the page..... its just not nearly the sad story you make it out to be. not even close.

 

EDIT: FTR I get some of it may be sarcasm but at what point, after you literally do it all the time, is it not considered sarcasm anymore? 

Yeah not even close. Rational is one thing but the name calling is ok as long as it geared toward the posters you do not like, right?. I get it man the best way to shut up the negative is to discredit them and throw in a few name calling, it's the same tactic used on the BBMB and brought over here.

 

Extremes is your post it had nothing to do with you but yet here you are doing the COT pile on about a negative post on Tyrod. I take things I have seen posted on this board and BBMB about Tyrod, the extreams are huge on how some post on him.Have a good day

Edited January 11, 2018 by xRUSHx

[Stank_Nasty]

2 minutes ago, xRUSHx said:

Yeah not even close. Rational is one thing but the name calling is ok as long as it geared toward the posters you do not like, right?. I get it man the best way to shut up the negative is to discredit them and throw in a few name calling, it's the same tactic used on the BBMB and brought over here. Have a good day.

i'm fairly certain I didn't use any names for you in either of my posts here that had anything to do with you. am I missing something? 

 

was it the Pollock calling the lot of you bastards? lol

[xRUSHx]

2 minutes ago, Stank_Nasty said:

i'm fairly certain I didn't use any names for you in either of my posts here that had anything to do with you. am I missing something? 

 

was it the Pollock calling the lot of you bastards? lol

Let it go man, your little finger pointing at me is taking over a good thread posted by the OP. Sorry OP for the rant back and forth

[JohnC]

35 minutes ago, Boyst62 said:

I still think Dennison is garbage but the game was called well.  But l, still garbage.  I just don't like hjm

 

I saw a lot of cover 3. I didn't recognize it at first because they appeared to show cover/tampa2 then walk the safety up to cover 3, sometimes backing the CB's off.  Taylor has not been able to read a field well, we all know that.  So Dennison still letting Taylor get these plays where he would see the defense shift pre snap was frustrating.

 

That's on Dennison. He needs to coach to his players. Taylor is incapable of adjustments in the field in most situations.  I don't doubt for a minute I can read a defense better than he can, hell, I was doing it the whole game from the stands.

 

What needs to happen is simple. If they're both staying they need a lot of time together. Dennison just doesn't get it and Taylor is incapable. If Dennison stays we will need such a specific type of QB that we will be limited if we can even identify one.  This is a disaster of a scheme and Dennison must go.  Taylor gives us a better chance to win than he does and that's sad!

In baseball you can be the best pitching coach in the game but if your pitcher lacks control no amount of good coaching is going to overcome that deficiency. In basketball you can be the best coach in the game but if your point guard doesn't have good vision and instincts the coaching is not going to compensate for that crushing deficiency. A teacher can stone cold know his/her subject matter. However, if the teacher lacks communication skills and is a dullard his knowledge is not going to be imparted to the students who will certainly be sleeping or playing with their devices at their desks. You can be greatest boxing trainer in the business. But if the boxer you are working with has clumsy feet, slow hands and nonexistent boxing tactics he is going to get his faced punched in regardless of the instructions he is getting from his corner

 

It doesn't matter how smart an OC is and how brilliant a game plan he can design. If your qb is inaccurate, lacks vision, can't make anticipatory throws and can't function within the pocket no amount of coaching is going to overcome such a flawed qb.  Greg Roman was a credible OC. Dennison is a credible OC. Neither is innovative or elite but both fall within the range of being reasonably competent.  Neither succeeded in elevating or at the minimum adequately managing the qb's limitations because of the inherit flaws of the qb each had to work with. When the opposition has you figured out and you have no flexibility to work outside of your small box then what do you expect? 

 

If Dennison had a credible qb to work with and it didn't work out then he is open to be criticized. That would be fair. But under the restrictive circumstances he had to deal with he had little chance to succeed. And so would any replacement coach who had to deal with the same circumstances!

[xRUSHx]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

In baseball you can be the best pitching coach in the game but if your pitcher lacks control no amount of good coaching is going to overcome that deficiency. In basketball you can be the best coach in the game but if your point guard doesn't have good vision and instincts the coaching is not going to compensate for that crushing deficiency. A teacher can stone cold know his/her subject matter. However, if the teacher lacks communication skills and is a dullard his knowledge is not going to be imparted to the students who will certainly be sleeping or playing with their devices at their desks. You can be greatest boxing trainer in the business. But if the boxer you are working with has clumsy feet, slow hands and nonexistent boxing tactics he is going to get his faced punched in regardless of the instructions he is getting from his corner

 

It doesn't matter how smart an OC is and how brilliant a game plan he can design. If your qb is inaccurate, lacks vision, can't make anticipatory throws and can't function within the pocket no amount of coaching is going to overcome such a flawed qb.  Greg Roman was a credible OC. Dennison is a credible OC. Neither is innovative or elite but both fall within the range of being reasonably competent.  Neither succeeded in elevating or at the minimum adequately managing the qb's limitations because of the inherit flaws of the qb each had to work with. When the opposition has you figured out and you have no flexibility to work outside of your small box then what do you expect? 

 

If Dennison had a credible qb to work with and it didn't work out then he is open to be criticized. That would be fair. But under the restrictive circumstances he had to deal with he had little chance to succeed. And so would any replacement coach who had to deal with the same circumstances!

Good post man

[Heathcliff]

4 hours ago, PolishDave said:

 And he probably eats wings with a knife and fork.

 

 

 

Not sure about the wings but I heard he ate his candy bars with a knife and fork.

 

Heathcliff (AKA Polish Paul)

[boyst]

1 hour ago, JohnC said:

In baseball you can be the best pitching coach in the game but if your pitcher lacks control no amount of good coaching is going to overcome that deficiency. In basketball you can be the best coach in the game but if your point guard doesn't have good vision and instincts the coaching is not going to compensate for that crushing deficiency. A teacher can stone cold know his/her subject matter. However, if the teacher lacks communication skills and is a dullard his knowledge is not going to be imparted to the students who will certainly be sleeping or playing with their devices at their desks. You can be greatest boxing trainer in the business. But if the boxer you are working with has clumsy feet, slow hands and nonexistent boxing tactics he is going to get his faced punched in regardless of the instructions he is getting from his corner

 

It doesn't matter how smart an OC is and how brilliant a game plan he can design. If your qb is inaccurate, lacks vision, can't make anticipatory throws and can't function within the pocket no amount of coaching is going to overcome such a flawed qb.  Greg Roman was a credible OC. Dennison is a credible OC. Neither is innovative or elite but both fall within the range of being reasonably competent.  Neither succeeded in elevating or at the minimum adequately managing the qb's limitations because of the inherit flaws of the qb each had to work with. When the opposition has you figured out and you have no flexibility to work outside of your small box then what do you expect? 

 

If Dennison had a credible qb to work with and it didn't work out then he is open to be criticized. That would be fair. But under the restrictive circumstances he had to deal with he had little chance to succeed. And so would any replacement coach who had to deal with the same circumstances!

Business at 29 South West

 

I fully disagree, with all due respect. I see it  to I-85 business US 29 South US 70 West as a coach should be able to work to the best of his roster regardless of lack of quality. Dennis and spent the entire season trying to cram a roundpeg into a square hole. He was unable to find what work for this team when anyone of us on this board so I wasn't working he kept doing it over and over again. His insistence to use tolbert's, his lack of ability to recognize The Limited role of our receivers, the inability to create mismatches with Charles Clay who actually had an outstanding year. ... The list just goes on

 

I saw enough to concern me with Denison as I did when it came to Nate Hackett and his inability to work with what he had on the roster.  Denison needs a Ryan Fitzpatrick. He isn't going to get that or anywhere near that with Tyrod Taylor

 

Further, that he pulled Taylor and put in Peterman when Peterman was not able to play nor ready is a huge indictment of what he can do as a coach. If he could not recognize what was coming out a practice with Peterman then I don't know what to say, and it's clear he did not see it. When I spoke with bills officials and people that cover this team in private at various events in the games I went to I was told that Peterman was not going to be ready this year he just wasn't catching on to the system and to the speed of the NFL. The same people said he has the upside of a career backup similar to that of Reich rt or Ryan Fitzpatrick. But they said it was glaringly obvious that he would be unable to contribute this year

 

Further that is backed up by more information I receive towards the end of the year which holds true to the rumors we heard, that players were not happy with Peterman playing in that San Diego game which is why we saw such a piss-poor performance by the team. Everyone knew why Taylor was benched, including the team. He isn't the best quarterback in the league and he's towards the bottom half more so than the top half. 

 

That's just plain fact but he's the best we had and I can't expect better because I've seen 3 years of his play. But I can expect someone who has the acclimation that Dennis and does to be able to contribute more to this team than what was done

 

Further, I'm fine with Taylor in 2018. People talk about him being one of the highest paid quarterbacks in the top 20, but that doesn't take into consideration how many quarterbacks are on rookie deals

[Beast]

Irv Weinstein thinks Colton Schmidt blew the game.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

6 hours ago, Tommy said:

Regarding the separation of our receivers, I saw a chart yesterday on Twitter from (I believe) Matt Harmon, who writes for NFL.com and other outlets. The chart contained "next gen stats" and indicated average yards of separation of WRs at the time of QB release for all 32 teams. The Buffalo Bills were dead last in this metric. One interesting note was that the Chiefs were #1.

 

It's an interesting metric, but I'm not sure what it means.  For example, are the Chiefs #1 because Smith lofts them to Hill a lot and at ball release, he's already 5 yards past the nearest DB?  If another team has minimal separation, does it matter if they have a QB who is willing and able to thread the needle through the smallest hole, or a big tall WR who is always open 2 feet over his head? 

 

What seemed evident from the start of the season is that the Bills didn't have any WR who were able to gain separation TT was comfortable with, and once Clay was injured, Well Then.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, PolishDave said:

Excellent well thought out and well explained post!

 

Coaching is more than just desigigning a scheme that can work.   You have to teach your guys to execute it too.   That is like at least half of the coaches' duties.   If the players can't execute what you are telling them to do, well then you aren't doing your job well enough.  You either aren't teaching them or you are asking them to do too much.

 

People like to just blame the players for lack of execution.  That is only fair if you think all players are superstars and should be able to execute anything thrown at them.    There probably aren't more than 3 or 4 players on each team that can execute anything thrown at them.   The truth is - different guys have different things they are good and bad at. 

 

It is up to the coach to devise a system they can execute and teach them to execute it exceptionally well.

 

This again lends more weight to the idea of simplifying everything until you can execute all the basic stuff really well.   Then build on that and complicate things more as you go on.   

 

But most coaches (in my guestimation) start right out with complicated stuff and keep trying to run it even when their team has proven they can't execute it.  And say the players just aren't good enough.   Maybe they aren't.   But if they aren't, it is at least partially the coaches' fault.

 

Does anyone think that this BIlls' offense is executing these plays with a high degree of success in practice?   I don't.   At least not against live fire action.    Maybe in walk throughs.     Because how could you possibly suck that bad in the game if you are executing them well in practice?

 

Thanks for the kind word.

 

I seem to remember Gailey, in his 3rd year as HC, talking about how the offense had progressed from his first year - he started simple and added on.  Perhaps that's why he got some performance out of his "goonie" WR.  I think a lot of coaches do just as you say: "here's the playbook, get ready go".

 

It's certainly fair to blame the players for lack of execution sometimes, sure, but it's also fair to ask if the coach is asking them to do something beyond their physical capabilities or their comfort with the system sometimes, because if they have to think about what to do for a fraction of a second, that's all it takes to get blown back off the line.

 

Perhaps the players are executing well in practice - I hope they are - but the guys they're executing against during the season are the backups and the taxi squad.  Anyone think there might be a bit of difference between blocking Cap Capi and blocking Myles Jack?  I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the former equates to running 1/2 or 2/3 the speed of the latter during a game.  Whoo hoo, my OL can block a borderline player, tell Von Miller "Bring It!"

 

5 hours ago, NewEraBills said:

To me this is not completely accurate.  Tyrod has played in this offense before.  Dennison was his QB coach in Baltimore.  This is what is so infuriating about it.  The Dennison hire was actually good on the surface because this was a guy your QB that you brought back had already worked with.  Why TT struggled in an offense he was supposed to already familiar be with I do not know.  But it is what it is at this point.

 

NewEra, there are a bunch of assumptions here. 

 

First, as you say, Dennison was the QB coach; Kubiak was the OC.  You're making the assumption that the system Dennison installed on his own as OC here in 2017 is exactly the same as the system Kubiak ran in Baltimore in 2014.  Chances are the terminology is different, and chances are Dennison wanted to try his own wrinkles now free from Kubiak. 

 

Second, sure, Taylor learned the system during Ravens OTA and training camp.  But during the season, he was the practice squad QB; he wasn't getting to execute the system, he was learning to simulate the offense they'd face each week.

 

Third, in a given offensive system, there are literally 1000s of plays, but the OC will pull maybe 100 to focus on, and put maybe 25-35 in the game plan that week.  So even if the system and terminology were identical or very close, the plays being focused on could be different enough that there's not a lot of familiarity.

 

Linking the two posts together, maybe that's part of the problem...maybe Dennison felt he was working with a smart hardworking guy who already knew his system so he could unlock a lot of the playbook, but in reality Taylor was much less grounded than he thought.

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, Boyst62 said:

I still think Dennison is garbage but the game was called well.  But l, still garbage.  I just don't like hjm

 

I saw a lot of cover 3. I didn't recognize it at first because they appeared to show cover/tampa2 then walk the safety up to cover 3, sometimes backing the CB's off.  Taylor has not been able to read a field well, we all know that.  So Dennison still letting Taylor get these plays where he would see the defense shift pre snap was frustrating.

 

That's on Dennison. He needs to coach to his players. Taylor is incapable of adjustments in the field in most situations.  I don't doubt for a minute I can read a defense better than he can, hell, I was doing it the whole game from the stands.

 

What needs to happen is simple. If they're both staying they need a lot of time together. Dennison just doesn't get it and Taylor is incapable. If Dennison stays we will need such a specific type of QB that we will be limited if we can even identify one.  This is a disaster of a scheme and Dennison must go.  Taylor gives us a better chance to win than he does and that's sad!

 

It may not be all on Taylor.  One of the evals of N'Orleans-Bills [by a contributor to Cover1 - not  Nate, sorry I forget who] made a point that Dennison was calling a lot of plays that were GREAT cover3 beaters - except the Saints were actually running Tampa-2, and it took well into the second half for Dennison to adjust what he was calling.  Maybe the word is out, you can fool the Bills OC into calling poor plays for your coverage, and then if you shift it again at the LOS, Taylor will totally miss the read.

 

I don't doubt you can read the D (from the stands) better than Taylor but then, you're not standing on the field with nothing but Vlad and Mills between you, Malik Jackson, and Yannick Ngakoue.  The degree of difficulty would seem to rise in that latter situation.

[BigDingus]

17 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

Haven't seen this linked here, excuse if I missed it.

 

Analysis of Bills-Jaguars by Cover1's Nate Turner

http://www.cover1.net/execution-comes-up-short-against-a-talented-jaguars-defense/

The bottom line doesn't change: Any time your defense holds the opponent to 10 points, you should win the game.  But some good stuff there I haven't seen elsewhere, such as the Jags using some obvious and snipeable defensive signals (Cover-3 and Palms) coverage that we missed.

 

He gives Dennison props for having enough in the game plan to win and puts a lot on the players for not executing.  On the one hand, sure - Taylor especially, the drops, the penalty calling back Shady's run.  On the other hand, if someone has been lacking at something all season, why ask them to do it in a playoff game?  If blocking assignments have been an issue for your OL all season and you haven't been calling traps, do you really want to dust off a trap just so's you can watch them mess it up?  Dance with what brung ya I say.   

 

Again, bottom line, our D came through, we had good enough talent and offensive game plan to win, we were just a handful of successful plays short.  Nate puts it mostly on Taylor, and maybe it belongs there.  OTOH, Nate is a clever analyst, and clever analysts appreciate clever play concepts by clever offensive coordinators - which is great provided the team has the right pieces to pull it off.  Sometimes it's better to KISS and stick to the things your men can execute really well.  Maybe that wouldn't have worked either.

 

Good read, have a look.

 

I've been saying this for quite a while now, as I've seen plenty in the game plan that allows us to win. It's just execution that falls short. It's why I don't feel strongly about getting rid of Dennison, as too many plays are left on the field each game. It's not just 1 play here or there, it's a lot of them...seemingly on every drive. It's just frustrating to not know how good the offense COULD be if the correct plays on the field were made.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, LeGOATski said:

Players learn just as much from a busted play as they do a successful one, maybe even more. This off-season Peterman and the rookie QB can study game film of this offense in real NFL games and learn exactly what to do/not to do, while observing tendencies of players who are actually on their team. 2017 was an installation year and the experience is going to make the 2018 learning curve that much smaller.

 

Agree to disagree about the game plan. Calling only the plays that your QB is comfortable with eventually gets super predictable. They may have been even worse off with that kind of approach. Maybe Tyrod didn't even want that, anyway. Maybe he's pushing himself to take the next step. Who knows.

 

Dennison designed a game plan that could beat the Jags' #1 defense. They prepared that game plan all week. The players aren't surprised by the calls. They know what they have to do and the responsibility is on them to get it done. Seeing successful play designs gives me hope that they could put up a lot of points on any defense with the right QB. 

 

Yes, we can agree to disagree.  The SB Bills did eventually get predictable - but until then, they ran a small set of plays and ran them really really well.  What Taylor wants or doesn't want is immaterial.  What's important is to put the players in the right position to win, we all agree on that.

 

My point is it isn't sufficient to prep a great game plan all week and practice.  The guy drawing it up must consider what his guys can absorb and what they are able to do well and at playoff game speed.  It's not an accident that when players on teams that turn it around are asked "what did Coach New do differently than Coach Old that helped?" the most popular answer seems to be "simplify".  Anthony Lynn said the best advice he got from a trusted pundit was "throw out half your game plan".   This isn't some notion I just dreamt.

 

Unless we trade for Cousins, "the right QB" isn't going to spring into our laps full-bore.  He is going to need to be led and developed.  Plans will need to be limited and simplified.  Will Dennison do this?  I don't know, but based on this season, the answer may be "Here's our game plan.  We got all these great plays that can really work!  Bring your hoist!" (to carry it home for study).

 

5 hours ago, NewEraBills said:

Hapless Bill I get what you are saying but I'd take a slightly different take.  You ask why call a trap?  You call a trap because when you looked on film you noticed that it was one of the running plays that the Jags struggled with tremendously.  They don't struggle with much in this department, but they do struggle with the trap.  So your run game coordinator looks at that and says he Rick, here is what I seen them struggle with.  Your run game coordinator trusts that his guys can run that play.  That's why the play is called.  It's not just Dennison at play here.

 

It's necessary, but not sufficient to draw up plays that your opponent will struggle with.  You also got to consider your guys familiarity, what they're able to do.  If the run game coordinator and OL coach trusted his guys could run that play, then his trust was misplaced. That begs the question "Why?"  Two possible reasons: Either the coaches aren't spending enough time hands-on with their guys so they get an accurate read, or they're throwing too much at them.   

 

Either way, though, the buck stops with Dennison for the offense.

 

In the case of the Jags, their D was 21st for most rush yards given up, so I doubt "they don't struggle with much" was too accurate.

 

4 hours ago, NewEraBills said:

I'm not into bashing TT.  I've seen him do better than this season. 

 

Indeed. 

Guessing that the "one read and run" vs "timid" are related aspects: he struggles to read the D, so if his first read's not there, his gut instinct is haul down and scamper.  He's been told in no uncertain terms that he'd better progress his reads, but he doubts what he sees and hesitates.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, Boyst62 said:

Business at 29 South West

 

I fully disagree, with all due respect. I see it  to I-85 business US 29 South US 70 West as a coach should be able to work to the best of his roster regardless of lack of quality. Dennis and spent the entire season trying to cram a roundpeg into a square hole. He was unable to find what work for this team when anyone of us on this board so I wasn't working he kept doing it over and over again. His insistence to use tolbert's, his lack of ability to recognize The Limited role of our receivers, the inability to create mismatches with Charles Clay who actually had an outstanding year. ... The list just goes on

 

I saw enough to concern me with Denison as I did when it came to Nate Hackett and his inability to work with what he had on the roster.  Denison needs a Ryan Fitzpatrick. He isn't going to get that or anywhere near that with Tyrod Taylor

 

Further, that he pulled Taylor and put in Peterman when Peterman was not able to play nor ready is a huge indictment of what he can do as a coach. If he could not recognize what was coming out a practice with Peterman then I don't know what to say, and it's clear he did not see it. When I spoke with bills officials and people that cover this team in private at various events in the games I went to I was told that Peterman was not going to be ready this year he just wasn't catching on to the system and to the speed of the NFL. The same people said he has the upside of a career backup similar to that of Reich rt or Ryan Fitzpatrick. But they said it was glaringly obvious that he would be unable to contribute this year

 

Further that is backed up by more information I receive towards the end of the year which holds true to the rumors we heard, that players were not happy with Peterman playing in that San Diego game which is why we saw such a piss-poor performance by the team. Everyone knew why Taylor was benched, including the team. He isn't the best quarterback in the league and he's towards the bottom half more so than the top half. 

 

That's just plain fact but he's the best we had and I can't expect better because I've seen 3 years of his play. But I can expect someone who has the acclimation that Dennis and does to be able to contribute more to this team than what was done

 

Further, I'm fine with Taylor in 2018. People talk about him being one of the highest paid quarterbacks in the top 20, but that doesn't take into consideration how many quarterbacks are on rookie deals

Your response is well thought out and clearly expressed. However, I strenuously disagree with the general theme of it. No one is making the case that the Peterman decision to start in the Charger game was in hindsight the right thing to do. But I'm one of the few posters here who had no problem with going with a different qb. The replacement wasn't a testament to Peterman's readiness as much as it was a testament to Taylor's struggles over the previous number of games. After seeing during the games and tape sessions the same mistakes the OC and HC tried something different. Was it an act of desperation? Absolutely!

 

Turning the discussion into who is the better qb or will be a better qb vis a vis Taylor and Peterman is a waste of time. Neither qb is now or in the future will be a franchise qb. That is a simple question for me to answer. That is why I have for years advocated using a high draft pick on a qb.  I have also without equivocation stated that last year the right draft strategy was to take either Mahomes or Watson. Just because JeffisMagic is vilified doesn't mean that he wasn't right in advocating for taking a qb in last year's draft.

 

Make no mistake about what I am saying about Dennison. I'm not declaring him to be some offensive guru who can elevate an offense with his innovation. Because he can't. As an offensive coordinator I consider him to be very uninspiring and average. If you want to criticize him for not adapting better to TT's limited talents then there is some merit to that line of reasoning. But what happened this year that made a limited qb even more ineffective was that the opposition adjusted to Taylor even more than in the past and took away what he did well and forced him to do what he was incapable of doing i.e. being a conventional pro qb.

 

As far as the issue regarding the players being upset with the qb change in the Charger game my response is that I don't care what they think. Ask McCoy after the Jaguar game if he was satisfied with the qbing in a game that was there for the taking? What do you think his response would be? 

 

You may be fine with Taylor on next year's roster but I'm not. It is for his sake and for the team that he get a fresh start somewhere else. I'm confident that this regime will deal him one way or the other and have some one else taking the snaps next year. My recommendation is to bring in a veteran qb and move up in the draft to get a high end prospect. 

 

 

[boyst]

36 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It may not be all on Taylor.  One of the evals of N'Orleans-Bills [by a contributor to Cover1 - not  Nate, sorry I forget who] made a point that Dennison was calling a lot of plays that were GREAT cover3 beaters - except the Saints were actually running Tampa-2, and it took well into the second half for Dennison to adjust what he was calling.  Maybe the word is out, you can fool the Bills OC into calling poor plays for your coverage, and then if you shift it again at the LOS, Taylor will totally miss the read.

 

I don't doubt you can read the D (from the stands) better than Taylor but then, you're not standing on the field with nothing but Vlad and Mills between you, Malik Jackson, and Yannick Ngakoue.  The degree of difficulty would seem to rise in that latter situation.

I was watching all game and must say I was thrown off by the disguises by the Jags. No wonder Roethlisberger and others have difficulty

 

Several times I swore it was cover 1.  CB's walk to LOS. Or off it. Then it changed to cover 3 under.  

 

They dared us to go deep and I was !@#$ing going nuts to just keep trying to go deep. We did once.  

 

If I can see it from a corner end zone 20soemthing rows up... I'm fairly certain 10 yards in front of you or half a football field in front you at the most is easy.

 

 

Dennison is the biggest part of the problem and the one that needs to be corrected.  Taylor is a problem but I can with him and I'd have been going deep all day.

 

Dennison is a lot of things I dislike. One of them is a coward. He can't be that stupid to not try to go deep with his position. You can't rise to that position being dumb.

 

He and Eric Wood need to go.

1 minute ago, JohnC said:

Your response is well thought out and clearly expressed. However, I strenuously disagree with the general theme of it. No one is making the case that the Peterman decision to start in the Charger game was in hindsight the right thing to do. But I'm one of the few posters here who had no problem with going with a different qb. The replacement wasn't a testament to Peterman's readiness as much as it was a testament to Taylor's struggles over the previous number of games. After seeing during the games and tape sessions the same mistakes the OC and HC tried something different. Was it an act of desperation? Absolutely!

 

Turning the discussion into who is the better qb or will be a better qb vis a vis Taylor and Peterman is a waste of time. Neither qb is now or in the future will be a franchise qb. That is a simple question for me to answer. That is why I have for years advocated using a high draft pick on a qb.  I have also without equivocation stated that last year the right draft strategy was to take either Mahomes or Watson. Just because JeffisMagic is vilified doesn't mean that he wasn't right in advocating for taking a qb in last year's draft.

 

Make no mistake about what I am saying about Dennison. I'm not declaring him to be some offensive guru who can elevate an offense with his innovation. Because he can't. As an offensive coordinator I consider him to be very uninspiring and average. If you want to criticize him for not adapting better to TT's limited talents then there is some merit to that line of reasoning. But what happened this year that made a limited qb even more ineffective was that the opposition adjusted to Taylor even more than in the past and took away what he did well and forced him to do what he was incapable of doing i.e. being a conventional pro qb.

 

As far as the issue regarding the players being upset with the qb change in the Charger game my response is that I don't care what they think. Ask McCoy after the Jaguar game if he was satisfied with the qbing in a game that was there for the taking? What do you think his response would be? 

 

You may be fine with Taylor on next year's roster but I'm not. It is for his sake and for the team that he get a fresh start somewhere else. I'm confident that this regime will deal him one way or the other and have some one else taking the snaps next year. My recommendation is to bring in a veteran qb and move up in the draft to get a high end prospect. 

 

 

There is little I can reply with as I agree with where you're coming from

 

My biggest frustration is why he wanted to start Peterman in that game.

 

After I return a PM to Hopless make sure I PM you some details of that that are not fit for open discussion