tbonehawaii Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 to us when we don't run when we could? for example we have a guy averaging over four yards per carry so why doi we have an empty backfield and throw to josh reed of all people on third and two? i curse you tom clements Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Or have a sack and a fumble on a 2 and 7 play mid way through the 4th quarter when all we had to do was run time off the clock and move the ball forward. A run there almost guarantees us a 3 and 4 situation much more favorable than a 3 and 7 - the most likely outcome barring a sack, fumble, or interception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mickey Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Just thinking out loud here but isn't it possible that part of the reason they had some success on the ground was because of the way they mixed up passing and running in the play calling? Besides, we ran the ball 39 times which seems like plenty to me. We also scored our only TD on a 55 yard pass play. You can't have plays like that if you never, ever, ever throw which seems to be the only strategy immune to criticism around here that we aren't running enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Just thinking out loud here but isn't it possible that part of the reason they had some success on the ground was because of the way they mixed up passing and running in the play calling? Besides, we ran the ball 39 times which seems like plenty to me. We also scored our only TD on a 55 yard pass play. You can't have plays like that if you never, ever, ever throw which seems to be the only strategy immune to criticism around here that we aren't running enough. 492858[/snapback] I think the criticism is more about when they elect to throw. I get the feeling that Clements doesn't have faith in the run game in crucial situations. Rarely did the Bills run two consecutive plays in a row--their last drive was one of the few exceptions I can recall. Given their play call mix, I don't think their play-fake is very effective. I'm also a big fan of the draw play, and I don't think they use it nearly enough as well. Between Clements and Gilbride, I almost miss Joe Pendry.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Exactly, its the timing of the play calls that upsets me the most. I agree you have to mix the pass in with the run. But when the run is working and its late in the game and you need to run the clock to keep their offense off the field - you run. At worse, you don't pick up the first down, have to punt and make them drive further to win. Also, the long pass to Evans that missed horribly was horribly timed as well in my opinion. 2 and 2 is when you try that not 2 and 10. On 2 and 10 you do something like a short pass, a screen, a run, etc. - something you know will pick up positive yards and make 3rd and shorter a possiblity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted November 1, 2005 Share Posted November 1, 2005 Just thinking out loud here but isn't it possible that part of the reason they had some success on the ground was because of the way they mixed up passing and running in the play calling? Besides, we ran the ball 39 times which seems like plenty to me. We also scored our only TD on a 55 yard pass play. You can't have plays like that if you never, ever, ever throw which seems to be the only strategy immune to criticism around here that we aren't running enough. 492858[/snapback] "Mixed it up"? Let's take a closer look at how they "mixed up" that final drive: Run Run Run Run Pass Pass Pass Pass What's "mixed up" about that? "Well...they did run AND pass in the same drive..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts