Greg Rousseau has turned out to be a complete slug.

[BuffaloBillsGospel2014]

1 hour ago, Kelly to Allen said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WTf sdoes this even mean? Great he wins and doesn't close, micah parsons has 12.5 sacks and can dominante a game, The run stops sounds promising though.

[Simon]

1 hour ago, Beck Water said:

Nah.  You got fans like myself, never played a snap of football.  And I do love me some stats.  But I also love the game of football - the chess match, trying to understand the way roles and responsibilities on the defense change depending on how the play develops post snap.

 

Yeah but you're part of that 10% of weirdos I left space for that are more interested in genuine understanding than the fallacy of surface impressions.

Freak. 

[Kelly to Allen]

45 minutes ago, BuffaloBillsGospel2014 said:

 

WTf sdoes this even mean? Great he wins and doesn't close, micah parsons has 12.5 sacks and can dominante a game, The run stops sounds promising though.

 

Parsons can't play the run at all

[BuffaloBillsGospel2014]

16 minutes ago, Kelly to Allen said:

 

Parsons can't play the run at all

 

I'd rather have a guy who gets to the QB than stops the run especially in a passing league imo. 

 

I found this also..... 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/46138675/2025-nfl-win-rates-top-teams-players-rankings-pass-run-block

[Pasaluki]

I think both arguments have merit. Joe B is continously glazing Rousseau for years now and I can't make the case that he doesn't know ball at a higher level than most. At the same time I get the criticism that a defensive end isn't generally the position I associate with non-production.

I think fans are smart enough to view a giant nosetackle or a fullback or a longsnapper as having value that is not tied to stats. A nosetackle could do his job and eat up a huge amount of space and not even record a tackle. If Rousseau is truly as dominant at run defense as is claimed he might be worth the money. Baked into that has to be the assumption that these other teams are ripping off these huge runs by running away from this guy. Its possible.

[Brand J]

52 minutes ago, Kelly to Allen said:

 

Parsons can't play the run at all

This has been a bit over-exaggerated on this board. Parsons isn’t the best run defender, but he’s not a total liability. In fact, the Packers had a primetime game a couple weeks ago and Collinsworth made an effort to put together a package of run stops to counter the “Parsons doesn’t play the run well” narrative. He’s an average run defender,  but that’s not what you’re paying him for. He makes $47M AAV because disrupting the QB is the most important ability in today’s NFL.

[bubba2018]

“but he’s great against the run”

 

“but who are we gonna hire” 

 

these are exactly the mindsets that keep a team exactly where they want to be at. 

[HoofHearted]

12 hours ago, Beck Water said:

 

Nah.  You got fans like myself, never played a snap of football.  And I do love me some stats.  But I also love the game of football - the chess match, trying to understand the way roles and responsibilities on the defense change depending on how the play develops post snap.   And I understand that I'm always going to be struggling to decode stuff that everyone who's played or coached at the college level grew up on.

 

And I don't do fantasy football.  That makes a huge difference these days.    The other factor is PFF.  They do a good job of some things.   They don't do a good job with line play - OL or DL - and sometimes with front 7 D - because their metrics can't really account for what the actual assignment was on the play.  They're guessing, and it's closer to a guess from someone like me than a guess from someone like @HoofHearted

To roll with your analogy: if I were an accountant from Raleigh looking to buy a tractor, the first thing I'd do is find me some farmers to chat up and find out what's important to them in a tractor.  Then that's what I'd look for.

 

The game has rules. Football is football at every level. Schemes are schemes. There’s no difference from High School to Professional. The higher the level the more volume of it you have, but the schemes don’t change.

[HoofHearted]

11 hours ago, Simon said:

 

Yeah but you're part of that 10% of weirdos I left space for that are more interested in genuine understanding than the fallacy of surface impressions.

Freak. 

Shhh 🤫… the “every run is shotgun draw” people need a place to vent too 😏

[Simon]

16 hours ago, boyst said:

Have you ever called plays? Specifically on defense or pass blocking schemes for the OL?

 

Never. I doubt my mind works quickly enough for me to have been any good at it.

The closest I ever got was having the ear of the guy who does call them i.e. "Buck, switch up to man the next time we have our ass backed up to the 10yrd line"

8 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

Shhh 🤫… the “every run is shotgun draw” people need a place to vent too 😏

 

They should broadcast every game in slomo.

But since you can't have a 7 hour broadcast, the least they could do is make the attempt to show more replays (which they seem to be slowly abandoning) so that folks actually have a chance to see what is really going on in there.

[Augie]

12 hours ago, BuffaloBillsGospel2014 said:

 

WTf sdoes this even mean? Great he wins and doesn't close, micah parsons has 12.5 sacks and can dominante a game, The run stops sounds promising though.

 

It means offenses have to deal with Rousseau, and he can be a handful in his own way. Yes, Parson has more sacks, as I’d expect. That’s what he does.  He also has a $47 Mil AAV, vs $20 Mil AAV for Groot. Parsons is also known for being relatively weak against the run, so they are just very different players, despite both being listed as DE. I’d love one of each! 

[EmotionallyUnstable]

15 minutes ago, Simon said:

make the attempt to show more replays (which they seem to be slowly abandoning)

Thank you.

 

It drives me nuts when they cut to some animated filler piece driven by statistics over the last few weeks, trends or whatever else they waste time on, instead of actually showing what happened on a play. It’s the Bills defense riding barrels over Niagara Falls with points per game stats rolling down the Niagara river instead of replays. 
 

Even the color guys now, they rarely ever offer anything of substance in regards to the actual play at hand, but instead just restate what happened:

 

Joe Buck:  “1st & 10 here, Allen takes the snap, surveys, and dumps it off to Johnson and he’s  wrapped up for a 2 yard gain”

 

Troy Aikman: “You see here he just quickly delivers it to the running back and Cincinnati get a good open field tackle to keep it a minimal gain” 

 

Oh. thanks for the insight. 

[HoofHearted]

3 minutes ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:

Thank you.

 

It drives me nuts when they cut to some animated filler piece driven by statistics over the last few weeks, trends or whatever else they waste time on, instead of actually showing what happened on a play. It’s the Bills defense riding barrels over Niagara Falls with points per game stats rolling down the Niagara river instead of replays. 
 

Even the color guys now, they rarely ever offer anything of substance in regards to the actual play at hand, but instead just restate what happened:

 

Joe Buck:  “1st & 10 here, Allen takes the snap, surveys, and dumps it off to Johnson and he’s  wrapped up for a 2 yard gain”

 

Troy Aikman: “You see here he just quickly delivers it to the running back and Cincinnati get a good open field tackle to keep it a minimal gain” 

 

Oh. thanks for the insight. 

Romo did and the networks told him to dumb it down. Thought he was a great hire and was going to revolutionize color commentary in regards to the amount of actual scheme breakdown you get in-game. Instead we got garbage PFF ratings shoved down our throats…

[nosejob]

28 minutes ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:

Thank you.

 

It drives me nuts when they cut to some animated filler piece driven by statistics over the last few weeks, trends or whatever else they waste time on, instead of actually showing what happened on a play. It’s the Bills defense riding barrels over Niagara Falls with points per game stats rolling down the Niagara river instead of replays. 
 

Even the color guys now, they rarely ever offer anything of substance in regards to the actual play at hand, but instead just restate what happened:

 

Joe Buck:  “1st & 10 here, Allen takes the snap, surveys, and dumps it off to Johnson and he’s  wrapped up for a 2 yard gain”

 

Troy Aikman: “You see here he just quickly delivers it to the running back and Cincinnati get a good open field tackle to keep it a minimal gain” 

 

Oh. thanks for the insight. 

I love listening to Brownie and Wood. Wish there wasn't a delay, I'd mute the telly.

 

As for comparing Greg to Parsons, yeah....Allen Parsons

Edited 10 hours ago by nosejob

[boyst]

41 minutes ago, Simon said:

 

Never. I doubt my mind works quickly enough for me to have been any good at it.

The closest I ever got was having the ear of the guy who does call them i.e. "Buck, switch up to man the next time we have our ass backed up to the 10yrd line"

 

They should broadcast every game in slomo.

But since you can't have a 7 hour broadcast, the least they could do is make the attempt to show more replays (which they seem to be slowly abandoning) so that folks actually have a chance to see what is really going on in there.

Since I'm on the exercise bike and tormenting myself at a slow pace I have some time...

 

In the experiences I had calling defensive sets the training I got was pretty interesting. This was HS but I've seen similar in the upper tiers. 

 

It was boiled down, parboiled down, then roasted. Basically, everything was grouped. We started the play call in the set we wanted, base, nickel, dime, heavy, etc... that was the given part

 

If the lineup is 21 and the TE is in line with a WR offline wide it is 1/3 of the call, it all came down to how they came out of their huddle since we already knew the personnel. 11 personnel it would be a different call.  Honestly I don't remember the terms as much as if it was a pass lineup like 11 we would move the monster back (varying version of nickel in the 3-4 we played) outside of my hip. If they shifted to bring the condensed package I'd move him inside. There wasn't a lot of changes for most of the field...

 

So in the huddle we would call our base of the scheme with the personnel on the field. It'd be the call for the DL, the call for the safeties and if anything special for the CB's (we played man primarily), and then the variable part is once the offense took the formation. Something like "Push heavy, cover 2, nickel low." The DL push their assignment to the strong side, safeties split the field, nickel comes inside the box at the snap to cover the middle. The IL linebackers would read and react, and the OLBs played more of a DE roll.  In this case the DE's had to know they didn't have outside help on the strong side from the nickel and can't lose contain since leverage is inside.

 

At the line as an OLB that was basically a DE I had to call the inside guys where to lineup and who their read was - Mile keyed the up back, whoever our Jack was I told who he keyed.

 

Those calls were based on who they put where as I said. They come out in 22 with a split on the line I'm keying the Mike (his name was Ray) on the upback in the backfield. He is to eat that lead blocker, shed him if he can, and either make the tackle or chase the QB. The Jack is to watch the weak side TE if he releases as the first read, check the screen, then crash the pocket to get the runner or attack the QB.

 

I would call one of maybe 6 calls by the word - usually concepts that week based on the team we play. If we are playing the vikings it'd be stuff like "purple," "gold," "horn," etc. of course we had our basic own stuff and we had those after our own team the wildcats.  So "cat," "black, " gold," etc were our norms.

 

In all of this the first part was simple, that was coached in by the sideline in most cases. In hurry up we had to make the calls ourselves. The second part is where you better study the film, know the scouting report, and have your wits about you. You had more time than you'd realize to make that call.

 

One of my most favorite annecdotes of this was my junior year. We blew out a team on Friday so starters didn't play a full 3 quarters. That meant that non seniors were eligible to play the JV game the next morning. Usually that was fun to do and just beat up on the freshman and sophomores. I begged to go play when I learned a few others were going to play, too. On Fridays I barely called the defense but I knew the reports well enough. The guy I would be playing for on Saturday morning was the guy who made the calls for the defense. I studied like hell and got to the game. I knew their entire playbook (JV games are super limited) and would call their plays out at the line. Our mike linebacker and nickel/monster were playing, too. They tried to run plays and we would shut them down. They'd like up and I'd call their play - "run left a-gap," "flanker post, check down to the TE."

 

It was just fun as hell as we destroyed them simply knowing their plays as good as they did. 

[Buffalo Junction]

10 hours ago, Brand J said:

This has been a bit over-exaggerated on this board. Parsons isn’t the best run defender, but he’s not a total liability. In fact, the Packers had a primetime game a couple weeks ago and Collinsworth made an effort to put together a package of run stops to counter the “Parsons doesn’t play the run well” narrative. He’s an average run defender,  but that’s not what you’re paying him for. He makes $47M AAV because disrupting the QB is the most important ability in today’s NFL.

Parsons is a better run defender than most give him credit for, but there are issues that need to be accounted for.
 

First, he lacks size compared to DE’s. That means talented long athletic O tackles like Spencer Brown can wash him out. Couple that with a good back that has solid vision and you might not see Parsons for most of a game unless it’s a blow out. He’s more of an edge than a DE, so that lack of size needs to be maximized with scheme. Dallas playing him at DE too much in a 4 man front wasn’t good for his run defense. 
 

Secondly, Parsons likes to big play hunt. He’ll crash instead maintain contain if he believes it’ll result in a sack or TFL. He also presses when other players aren’t getting the job done. That’s been accounted for in GB with scheme and the talent around him. 

14 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

It means offenses have to deal with Rousseau, and he can be a handful in his own way. Yes, Parson has more sacks, as I’d expect. That’s what he does.  He also has a $47 Mil AAV, vs $20 Mil AAV for Groot. Parsons is also known for being relatively weak against the run, so they are just very different players, despite both being listed as DE. I’d love one of each! 

They’d be good complimentary players. Particularly if Parsons got used in that role we say Hoecht in on 3rd and long. 

[Bermuda Triangle]

Very impactful first half for Groot. 

[BillsFan130]

Is Rousseau playing today?..

[Bermuda Triangle]

Just now, BillsFan130 said:

Is Rousseau playing today?..

Pay more attention.  That edge is being set, something fierce! 

[Mikie2times]

9 minutes ago, Bermuda Triangle said:

Very impactful first half for Groot. 

Hes “sneaky good”