Jump to content

Jim Kubiak Analysis in BN


Casey D
 Share

Recommended Posts

Behind a paywall, but it is an amazing read on the game and the adversity the Bills and Allen almost overcame. 

 

The gist of it is that the entire game plan went out the window due to injuries and heat exhaustion.  Lots of plays they would have liked to call could not be used. Execution was all effed up because the guys on the field rarely play together.  Despite all that, Allen still got them within a win, and six key mistakes-- anyone of which went differently likely would have ended the game with a W-- cost them.  That does not do the article justice, but there it is.

Edited by Casey D
  • Like (+1) 9
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, eball said:

No, I am certain that McD's terrible coaching cost the Bills the win.  I read it on this very forum.

 

No, this one was not all on McDermott. It would have been nice to see him challenge the Gabe Davis reception that should have been a TD though. Just saying. 

  • Like (+1) 3
  • Disagree 8
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, H2o said:

No, this one was not all on McDermott. It would have been nice to see him challenge the Gabe Davis reception that should have been a TD though. Just saying. 

 

I disagree. That would have been upheld. I would have been pissed if they challenged that.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Agree 8
  • Thank you (+1) 1
  • Dislike 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Casey D said:

Behind a paywall, but it is an amazing read on the game and the adversity the Bills and Allen almost overcame. 

 

The gist of it is that the entire game plan went out the window due to injuries and heat exhaustion.  Lots of plays they would have like to call could not be used. Execution was all effed up because the guys on the field rarely play together.  Despite all that, Allen still got them within a win, and six key mistakes-- anyone of which went differently likely would have ended the game with a W-- cost them.  That does not do the article justice, but there it is.

 

Kumerow going out early was big i think.  Good run blocking WR, and the depth behind diggs and davis.  Davis played the entire game because he didn't cramp - but Diggs and Mckenzie both did.  Diggs out means mckenzie or crowder lining up in his spots.  Cook, Morris, Gilliam, all likely stepped in at times.  Not to mention the patchwork unit on the offensive line.  

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Beast said:

 

I disagree. That would have been upheld. I would have been pissed if they challenged that.

Possession, two feet, and what seemed to be a football move before it was knocked out is what I saw. Even if we didn't get the call reversed by the refs, who were ABSOLUTELY suspect this game, I wouldn't have been mad at the challenge in any way. 

  • Disagree 1
  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most interesting point of advanced knowledge is when we lost Van Rotten and how it changed our gameplan.

 

Even with Van Rotten it was a bad situation.

 

Josh is best under center. Always has been. Van Roten was having several issues under center with Josh and it delayed Josh. Then when Van Roten went out we had to go to shotgun. 

 

No team spends much time on their backup Center. And old acquaintance of mine was a backup Center for several years and seldom got to practice with the starters. Relegated to scout team and the backup. And every QB likes the ball a certain way - a half inch off can be crucial. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The last couple of drives Allen was pressing. He has a tendency to get like that when we're down and the clock is ticking. You were starting to see the more erratic, sugar-high, Josh. He had a handful of risky throws that by all accounts should have been intercepted.

 

I'm going to chalk it up to mental and physical exhaustion and having to play with a completely different cast of players that he's normally used to playing with.

  • Agree 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Bleeding Bills Blue said:

 

Kumerow going out early was big i think.  Good run blocking WR, and the depth behind diggs and davis.  Davis played the entire game because he didn't cramp - but Diggs and Mckenzie both did.  Diggs out means mckenzie or crowder lining up in his spots.  Cook, Morris, Gilliam, all likely stepped in at times.  Not to mention the patchwork unit on the offensive line.  

 

I think Kumerow going out changed a lot of the work they did during the week to set up blocking schemes/plays for the run game. I think him going out made running a lot of run plays complicated and/or impossible, with the right side of the line out and using 2nd and 3rd string centers further complicating things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Beast said:

 

I disagree. That would have been upheld. I would have been pissed if they challenged that.

 

Why?

 

That was during a 15+ play drive near the endzone. The offense was so overheated that there were injury stoppages due to players needing to take a knee on the field. 

 

I argue that it would have been the PERFECT time to challenge a call. Worst case scenario you lose the challenge but get an extra long timeout for your tired and overheated offense to rest and get ready for a push into the endzone. Challenging that call would have been strategic and smart.

 

Instead our offense that was having trouble standing up floundered and couldn’t get into the endzone.

 

You should be more upset that he called timeout on a PUNT and another timeout on a random first down closer to midfield the very next drive.

  • Like (+1) 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, H2o said:

Possession, two feet, and what seemed to be a football move before it was knocked out is what I saw. Even if we didn't get the call reversed by the refs, who were ABSOLUTELY suspect this game, I wouldn't have been mad at the challenge in any way. 

Zero percent chance that got reversed.  Zero.  There was no football move.  If you’re going to challenge that you might as well challenge the missed FG saying it actually went through.  Equal chance at reversal.  Zero.

  • Agree 4
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Einstein said:

 

Why?

 

That was during a 15+ play drive near the endzone. The offense was so overheated that there were injury stoppages due to players needing to take a knee on the field. 

 

I argue that it would have been the PERFECT time to challenge a call. Worst case scenario you lose the challenge but get an extra long timeout for your tired and overheated offense to rest and get ready for a push into the endzone. Challenging that call would have been strategic and smart.

 

Instead our offense that was having trouble standing up floundered and couldn’t get into the endzone.

 

You should be more upset that he called timeout on a PUNT and another timeout on a random first down closer to midfield the very next drive.

 

I would have also challenged that ruling, if only to cause a 2-3 minute stoppage in play to give my guys a rest. Timeouts take 30 seconds, challenges take a couple of minutes. Even if you lose the challenge the result is the same, you end up using a timeout.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, H2o said:

Possession, two feet, and what seemed to be a football move before it was knocked out is what I saw. Even if we didn't get the call reversed by the refs, who were ABSOLUTELY suspect this game, I wouldn't have been mad at the challenge in any way. 

It was similar to the Lee Evans play in the AFC title game vs New England about ten years ago or so. You have to complete the play, there is no move to make in the end zone . He got lazy and let the DB swat the ball from his hands. Have to be more careful on those plays. I believe the call would have been allowed to stand. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 4merper4mer said:

Zero percent chance that got reversed.  Zero.  There was no football move.  If you’re going to challenge that you might as well challenge the missed FG saying it actually went through.  Equal chance at reversal.  Zero.

 

The reversal wasn't the point, the point would have been to cause a stoppage in play to give players a rest period longer than a standard timeout.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, uninja said:

 

I think Kumerow going out changed a lot of the work they did during the week to set up blocking schemes/plays for the run game. I think him going out made running a lot of run plays complicated and/or impossible, with the right side of the line out and using 2nd and 3rd string centers further complicating things.

 

He had back to back catches on one drive too.  I think he was there to really keep diggs fresh to make it harder on howard and it just never worked out that way.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

Zero percent chance that got reversed.  Zero.  There was no football move.  If you’re going to challenge that you might as well challenge the missed FG saying it actually went through.  Equal chance at reversal.  Zero.

 

I don’t agree with this. How many TD’s (in the endzone) do you see a football move happen? How many jukes, etc happen after catching in the endzone?

 

People will say “it’s the time that matters”. Except it’s often not. Watch this clip below. Lamb catches the ball and refs signal TD nearly immediately. THEY ARENT EVEN LOOKING AT HIM ON THE GROUND to see if he dropped it.

 

Just 2 feet were in, TD.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Casey D said:

Behind a paywall, but it is an amazing read on the game and the adversity the Bills and Allen almost overcame. 

 

The gist of it is that the entire game plan went out the window due to injuries and heat exhaustion.  Lots of plays they would have like to call could not be used. Execution was all effed up because the guys on the field rarely play together.  Despite all that, Allen still got them within a win, and six key mistakes-- anyone of which went differently likely would have ended the game with a W-- cost them.  That does not do the article justice, but there it is.

 

That's the game I saw. Apparently everyone else saw the Dolphins totally dominate and crush the Bills to the point where they are the new #1 in "power rankings."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...