smokinandjokin Posted October 31, 2005 Author Share Posted October 31, 2005 Moulds is no longer "our best recevier." 491941[/snapback] Really? I didn't know that. Regardless, could not be covered last night. 9 catches for 125 is a lot better than whoever "our best receiver" you are referring to produced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Moulds in the flat was a good decoy. They knew he'd draw 2, if not 3 cover men. The problem is, noodle arm want supposed to actually THROW it to him! 491523[/snapback] Actually the play's primary receiver was Roscoe but they doubled him with deep safety help. Holcomb wanted to go to him, but said that they had his route well-defended and instead tried to put the ball in the hands of one of the offense's play makers who was wide open. Moulds has a habit of making the first guy miss, so I don't see where protecting the ball (by not getting INT'd) and putting the ball in Moulds' hands to make a play is necessarily a bad thing... Granted, it doesn't jive with the incessant "noodle-arm" cracks, but that's what happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramius Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Actually the play's primary receiver was Roscoe but they doubled him with deep safety help. Holcomb wanted to go to him, but said that they had his route well-defended and instead tried to put the ball in the hands of one of the offense's play makers who was wide open. Moulds has a habit of making the first guy miss, so I don't see where protecting the ball (by not getting INT'd) and putting the ball in Moulds' hands to make a play is necessarily a bad thing... Granted, it doesn't jive with the incessant "noodle-arm" cracks, but that's what happened. 491966[/snapback] If you are going to throw a 3 yard pattern on 4th and 7, it better be a slant or a pattern where you are already going upfield. An out isnt going to cut it, when you are counting on the guy catching it, reversing field, and then making someone miss to pick up a first down on 4th and 7. Dumbass play call, even more retarded throw by holcrap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluv Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Actually the play's primary receiver was Roscoe but they doubled him with deep safety help. Holcomb wanted to go to him, but said that they had his route well-defended and instead tried to put the ball in the hands of one of the offense's play makers who was wide open. Moulds has a habit of making the first guy miss, so I don't see where protecting the ball (by not getting INT'd) and putting the ball in Moulds' hands to make a play is necessarily a bad thing... Granted, it doesn't jive with the incessant "noodle-arm" cracks, but that's what happened. 491966[/snapback] Are you serious? Do you think Moulds is Houdini? Time he caught the ball he was surrounded by 3 defenders. He should have been the PRIMARY receiver, not a decoy on 4th and 7. Campy are you sure your last name isn't Clemens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyDingo Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Moulds was nothing more than a decoy and KH choked and tossed it too him. Of course someone else couldve stepped up to help KH but didnt. 491519[/snapback] T80 great sig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Are you serious?Yes. Do you think Moulds is Houdini? Time he caught the ball he was surrounded by 3 defenders. He should have been the PRIMARY receiver, not a decoy on 4th and 7. I won't apologize for liking the idea of spreading the ball around - it keep defenses honest - and it forces them to respect your weapons. What's the point of having players like Evans and Roscoe on the roster if you aren't going to give them opportunities to make plays? Campy are you sure your last name isn't Clemens? 492045[/snapback] Why does trying to relay Holcomb's interpretation of that play (from his post game press conference here) make you sling what I imagine is your most creative insult in years? The play wasn't called to go to Moulds. People are criticizing the play call when they don't even know what it was! Holcomb didn't want to throw it to a wide open Patriot safety so he checked down in hopes that Moulds could make a play for him. It didn't work out -big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted October 31, 2005 Author Share Posted October 31, 2005 The play wasn't called to go to Moulds. People are criticizing the play call when they don't even know what it was! Holcomb didn't want to throw it to a wide open Patriot safety so he checked down in hopes that Moulds could make a play for him. It didn't work out -big deal. 492064[/snapback] Big deal? I think everyone knows what the play was. It was designed for Moulds to run a two-yard route, which he did. The question is: WHY? The one guy who is our money man, couldn't be covered all night, but we're going to look for Roscoe "One career catch" Parrish? If you throw to Moulds, or anybody beyond the marker, what's the worst that happens? Interception, pass defensed, or bad throw. Game over. What's the best that happens? Completion, pass interference. Both = first down. But we throw short, take the pass interference out of the equation, and ask a guy (without a head of steam) to beat 3 defenders and pickup 7 yards. Please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gambler Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Sure I'm mad at Holcomb for throwing short to Moulds on our last offensive play, but what kind of call is that? How could they possbily call a play which is designed to have your #1 receiver run a two yard route? I'm sure Holcomb looked downfield, and he knows he can't take a sack there, but to expect Moulds to pickup 5,6,7 yards on his own is rediculous. Left a real bad taste in my mouth. 491514[/snapback] Good coaching and play calling will be the difference. I remember when Bills head coach John Rauch wanted to use OJ Simpson as a decoy!!! Maybe by running all your best receivers 2 yards downfield on a 4th and 7 you will confuse the defense? "Take what the defense gives you" BRILLIANT COACHING! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I think it's obvious that Moulds was not the #1 option. But the point is, why not? Decoys are great and can work during the course of the game. But when you have one play to keep the chance of victory alive, you do not decoy with your best receiver. A dump off option is important. Holcomb CANNOT take a sack there, and if there is pressure (which there really wasn't) he needs an outlet to at least avoid a sack and give the chance for someone to make guys miss and pick up a first down. So why not Shaud Williams? Run Moulds on an eight yard route along with Parrish and Evans. The Bills took Moulds out of the play before it even started. 491936[/snapback] Well if not Moulds why not Lee Evans?? Or Cambell? Or are they in the Doghouse now too? The Play was designed to go to Roscoe Parrish??? The biggest Play of the Season to date and it's designed to go to your 1st Year, 2nd Rounder who is seeing his 1st significant time at WR this Season??? Are you kidding Me? SO typical of this Coaching Staff...Out-thinking themselves before the Ball is even snapped... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Big deal? I think everyone knows what the play was. It was designed for Moulds to run a two-yard route, which he did. The question is: WHY? The one guy who is our money man, couldn't be covered all night, but we're going to look for Roscoe "One career catch" Parrish? If you throw to Moulds, or anybody beyond the marker, what's the worst that happens? Interception, pass defensed, or bad throw. Game over. What's the best that happens? Completion, pass interference. Both = first down. But we throw short, take the pass interference out of the equation, and ask a guy (without a head of steam) to beat 3 defenders and pickup 7 yards. Please. 492081[/snapback] Until you get inside of Holcomb's helmet, we're just going to have to go by what he said happened. He checked down and found an open receiver and tried to let him make a play. It didn't work. Your life isn't over. The Bills aren't moving to LA. It's one play in one game, it didn't work. It's over and done with. Get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Well if not Moulds why not Lee Evans?? Or Cambell? Or are they in the Doghouse now too? The Play was designed to go to Roscoe Parrish??? The biggest Play of the Season to date and it's designed to go to your 1st Year, 2nd Rounder who is seeing his 1st significant time at WR this Season??? Are you kidding Me? SO typical of this Coaching Staff...Out-thinking themselves before the Ball is even snapped... 492110[/snapback] I completely agree. That was a terrible call, and it really put Holcomb in a position to fail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 pretty much, he should have run for the first down. he had the next 20 yards wide open. ... also its good to see words like "franchise receiver" used regarding moulds. enough with this cutting him talk. the guy is awesome and needs to be on this offense even when he is over the hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted October 31, 2005 Author Share Posted October 31, 2005 Until you get inside of Holcomb's helmet, we're just going to have to go by what he said happened. He checked down and found an open receiver and tried to let him make a play. It didn't work. Your life isn't over. The Bills aren't moving to LA. It's one play in one game, it didn't work. It's over and done with. Get over it. 492117[/snapback] You're right Campy. Having your #1 receiver run a 2-yard route probably was the best play available. Holcomb did everything possible to find an open receiver before that. I'll just skip along through the park today whistling on my merry way, not upset that the Bills lost to the Super Bowl champs in a game they deserved to win. The game is won and lost on a sequence of "one plays." The Bills chose the biggest "one play" to deliver their worst play call of the night. All I'm saying is it leaves a bad taste and an opportunity for second guessing. Incomplete to anybody (Moulds, Evans, Parrish, Campbell) for 9 yards, I would say "Dang, tough break, they played hard." But to end it like that, without a prayer of making a first down, makes it hard to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 I completely agree. That was a terrible call, and it really put Holcomb in a position to fail. 492124[/snapback] Sending the fastest player on the team, the one who wowwed everyone with his hands and athletic ability in camp, downfield on a 4th and 7 isn't really "setting up the QB to fail", is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 When you think about it, the New England secondary was banged up. They had guys out there who had been on the roster for only two weeks. Two weeks! Instead of using Moulds to attack that weakness on a must-have play, they're using him as a decoy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted October 31, 2005 Author Share Posted October 31, 2005 Sending the fastest player on the team, the one who wowwed everyone with his hands and athletic ability in camp, downfield on a 4th and 7 isn't really "setting up the QB to fail", is it? 492136[/snapback] Not if he throws it to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Sending the fastest player on the team, the one who wowwed everyone with his hands and athletic ability in camp, downfield on a 4th and 7 isn't really "setting up the QB to fail", is it? No its not, but when I played ball, and we needed to convert a 3rd and 6 or 4th and 7, we'd have a play called "Sticks" (which every team has, BTW). We'd line up 4 wides, send them each on curl routes 1 yard past the 1st down marker. Then they turned around. The QB would hit whoever wasn't doubled, letting the throw go as the WR turned around. They went 1 yard past, so they could come back for the ball and still have the 1st. This isn't rocket science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Sending the fastest player on the team, the one who wowwed everyone with his hands and athletic ability in camp, downfield on a 4th and 7 isn't really "setting up the QB to fail", is it? 492136[/snapback] Yes it is. Getting open is more than raw speed, it also involves deception, making moves, stuff like that. Things that Parrish has no experience doing on a professional level. Things that typically take a WR about three years to master. If Moulds' purpose is to be a decoy and absorb coverage men, fine. Line him up on one side of the field, and your intended targets on the other. Then have Moulds run past the first down marker so that if your intended targets are covered, your QB still has the option of throwing a jump ball to a tall, physical target. If you want to give your QB a dump-off option, have said option be McGahee, because that's the guy most able to break tackles and create yards on his own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 There is no reason that any receiver should have been inside 7 yards. The only one that should have been closer would be an outlet receiver such as Shelton (if he was even in there, I don't recall), not your No. 1 guy. Every other receiver should have been beyond 7 yards out. Terrible play call and terrible play by Holcomb to not realize you must throw it beyond 7, even if it risks an INT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted October 31, 2005 Share Posted October 31, 2005 Yes it is. Getting open is more than raw speed, it also involves deception, making moves, stuff like that. Things that Parrish has no experience doing on a professional level. Things that typically take a WR about three years to master. 492156[/snapback] He ran past the corner and would have been wide open if not for the safety who rotated over there after the snap, according to Holcomb. If the safety doesn't roll to Roscoe, Holcomb was going to go there, but the safety ended up drifting directly to the spot he was going to throw the ball. I just don't see where it's a bad idea. As for the rest of your post, I can't say I disagree. I was hoping they'd have McGahee as a 1 or 2 receiving option because, like you inferenced, he's a major threat in the open field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts