GG Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Another gem from the ESPN sage:: Mularkey was hired to turn around Drew Bledsoe's career and reviews weren't good in Week 1. Bledsoe completed 17 passes for only 153 yards. The good news is that he was sacked just once. The bad news is that he got rid of the ball so quickly the offense was invisible. Uhm, he completed 17 because he only threw 26 times (65%) and finished with a 95 rating. Only 17 completions, before you discount 3 clean drops. The offense was invisible due to 3 major errors in the red zone, none of which were DB's fault. But, yes, I know it's a lot easier to write your columns in the offseason and then insert the dates of the regular season weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Sullivan is his Bills contact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndyJay1234 Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Another gem from the ESPN sage::Uhm, he completed 17 because he only threw 26 times (65%) and finished with a 95 rating. Only 17 completions, before you discount 3 clean drops. The offense was invisible due to 3 major errors in the red zone, none of which were DB's fault. But, yes, I know it's a lot easier to write your columns in the offseason and then insert the dates of the regular season weeks. 34852[/snapback] Are you saying that 10 points set up by 2 turnovers is good work by the Drew Bledsoe run offense? Is it his fault that was the gameplan? No. But it did not work. The statement he got rid of the ball so quickly implies short routes. That is a fact. Going downfield a few times is important. Bledsoe was effective yes. 17-26 with 3-4 dropped balls. The point that Clayton is making correctly is that when you do not attempt to stretch the field at all during a game you reduce your chance of being effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 I really like John Clayton... I'll let him have this one... we'll call it a pardon. If he !@#$s up again though, that's it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wnyguy Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 I haven't liked him since he left Monty Python. Except for when he was in A Fish Called Wanda. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted September 17, 2004 Author Share Posted September 17, 2004 Are you saying that 10 points set up by 2 turnovers is good work by the Drew Bledsoe run offense? Is it his fault that was the gameplan? No. But it did not work. The statement he got rid of the ball so quickly implies short routes. That is a fact. Going downfield a few times is important. Bledsoe was effective yes. 17-26 with 3-4 dropped balls. The point that Clayton is making correctly is that when you do not attempt to stretch the field at all during a game you reduce your chance of being effective. 34881[/snapback] Bull. This article was written in his mind months ago. Trouble for Clayton is that DB had a very good game. But to stick with the premeditated thought Clayton picked the nuggets out of the game that minimized DB's accomplishments in that game. Let's see how he starts off the piece. "Mike Mularkey's goal is to turn around DB's career..." The blueprint for that turnaround is clear - feature the run, take pressure off DB, make him get rid of the ball sooner. How did the Bills follow that script in Week 1? To a tee. If Clayton wants to slam the offensive game plan, then do so. Don't wrap it around a thoughtless piece that DB was responsible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Bull. This article was written in his mind months ago. Trouble for Clayton is that DB had a very good game. But to stick with the premeditated thought Clayton picked the nuggets out of the game that minimized DB's accomplishments in that game. Let's see how he starts off the piece. "Mike Mularkey's goal is to turn around DB's career..." The blueprint for that turnaround is clear - feature the run, take pressure off DB, make him get rid of the ball sooner. How did the Bills follow that script in Week 1? To a tee. If Clayton wants to slam the offensive game plan, then do so. Don't wrap it around a thoughtless piece that DB was responsible. 34894[/snapback] LOL! So Bledsoe's problem before was holding the ball too long, now it's throwing too quickly, to the tune of a 65% completion percentage? Are you friggin' kidding me, Johnny C? I guess if he held the ball a little longer he still would have taken only 1 sack, Moulds wouldn't have fumbled twice, and there wouldn't have been 3 flat-out dropped passes. :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeRay Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 so what's the problem? Wasn't Mularkey hired to recycle Bledsoe? or is that an outright untruth? Didn't Bledsoe complete only 17 passes for 153 Yards or was that untrue as well? forget about the "would be" catches... they are a figment of one's immagination... they are officially "never was's". otherwise the bills are in 5 straigth SBs if only Ronnie Harmon hadn't dropped that pass and they win at least one SB if only "NorWIDE" was "NorRIGHTON". But that's "pretend... cuz it id not happen So Hammer Clayton because he stated fact? If you're gonna Hammer him, hammer him because he looks like a pencil necked geek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarthur31 Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Clayton needs to check himself! Icehole! :I starred in Brokeback Mountain: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JinVA Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 A little known fact is that back in the 50's Clayton was one of the most feared linebackers in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 17 of 26 for 150 and change? It's called a ball control offense, John. You know...football? Ever heard of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YOOOOOO Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Just another so called expert who makes a judgements after looking at the game stats and never atleast taking a look at the actual game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachChuckDickerson Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Everyone knows Clayton is a douche bag. Did anyone happen to catch sports center this morning when he and Salsbury went 4 downs? Everytime he started to talk all the nilitary personel started chanting BORING! BORING! He is universally hated. Never fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guesteroo Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Hey, has anyone else ever noticed this while watching John on TV?. . . After he's been speaking a while, spittle accumulates on his bottom lip. It is fairly disgusting. I don't think he wipes it off until after he's off the air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 Everyone knows Clayton is a douche bag. Did anyone happen to catch sports center this morning when he and Salsbury went 4 downs? Everytime he started to talk all the nilitary personel started chanting BORING! BORING! He is universally hated. Never fear. 35330[/snapback] That was set up. Way obvious. I was actually getting a little pissed because the debates between them are usually pretty good and I couldn't hear him. They agreed on everything this time anyway so I guess it's no biggie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 so what's the problem? Wasn't Mularkey hired to recycle Bledsoe? or is that an outright untruth? Nope. Wyche was hired to "recycle" Bledsoe, and Clements to a lesser extent, given his work with Stewart and Maddox and the fact that he's the OC. You could call it Mularkey's system though. Didn't Bledsoe complete only 17 passes for 153 Yards or was that untrue as well? Leaving out the completion percentage was bush-league reporting. Completing "only" 17 passes WOULD suck...IF he threw the ball 30 or more times. Since he threw the ball "only" 26 times, 17 isn't an "only," it's a damn good completion percentage. And for a team featuring the run, throwing the ball more would have made them liars. forget about the "would be" catches... they are a figment of one's immagination... they are officially "never was's". otherwise the bills are in 5 straigth SBs if only Ronnie Harmon hadn't dropped that pass and they win at least one SB if only "NorWIDE" was "NorRIGHTON". But that's "pretend... cuz it id not happen You have a point here. However I'll take a 65% completion percentage, no turnovers, 1 sack, and 3 imaginary dropped passes anyday of the week. I'd just rather see a better effort from the OTHER players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njsue Posted September 17, 2004 Share Posted September 17, 2004 What is that skinny necked moron up to now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts