AJ1 Posted October 3, 2004 Share Posted October 3, 2004 Bull. That was a straight-back drop. 4th and 3, and you drop your QB another 5 yards before he he starts the bootleg...and pull a guard to let a LB in unblocked and blow up the play in the backfield? If that was designed as a naked bootleg, it's the most god-awfully designed play I've seen since...well, since about fifteen minutes before it, on that ridiculous fake end around screen pass atrocity... If Mularkey calls another end around, I'm going to personally drive up to Orchard Park and kick is ass... 54430[/snapback] That play was executed so poorly, I honestly believe it was possible that each of the eleven on field Bills thought it was a different play. Kind of like Japanese movie Rashomon(sp)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kultarr Posted October 3, 2004 Share Posted October 3, 2004 Now to be clear ... I NEVER want to see Drew running as a option but it WAS open all day. It may have been "open" ... and for *damn* sure the Patriots would never dream of defending it ... but we are talking about the slowest guy on the field. What is Bledsoe's 40 time these days? 2.5 hours? He's so pathetic, anybody could've easily caught him from behind and tackled him for a loss. And it was 3 yards, so just tucking the ball into his belly button and falling forward would not have worked either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 3, 2004 Share Posted October 3, 2004 That play was executed so poorly, I honestly believe it was possible that each of the eleven on field Bills thought it was a different play. Kind of like Japanese movie Rashomon(sp)? 54460[/snapback] I was about to ask "Which play?" Then I realized what a dumb and ultimately irrelevent question it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 It was a coaching error.... You do NOT run a Bledsoe bootleg when its 4th and 3 with the game on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBob Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 Sadly, had Baker not been offside on the Patsies field goal, we would have been taking the easy field goal to tie on that 4th and 3 and kicking off to play Defense with a tie ball game to protect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maddog Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 The problem with this play was twofold: 1 - the obvious poor execution. In the Mularkey press conference he stated that Henry ran the wrong way - I believe he was supposed to dive up the middle. Additionally, an unnamed lineman blew an assignment as well. Even if TH hit the hole, the play would have been blown up due to the lineman error (Mularkey's assessment, not mine). 2 - the play is better suited for fourth-and-1 not fourth-and-3. The defense is not selling out defensing the run on 4th-and-3. In fact, 4th-and-3 is generally a passing down, not a running down. My guess is that Clements/Mularkey had this play in mind if the 3rd and 1 play got stuffed. Unfortunately, they lost yardage on the play they had a bit further to go. On opening night, the Colts had 4th-and-1 from the New England 41 and ran a naked bootleg with Manning who "rambled" for 19 yards. This, coupled with the observations that the Pats were leaving the backside exposed against the Bills indicates the call may not have been a bad one, except for the distance (3 yards needed not 1) and of course the horrendous execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WILLIS Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I would have loved to see a Jumbo split back formation with TH and willis, direct snap to one of them he pitches to the other for a toss sweep weakside, have the Oline block like its a run strongside then with that pitch BAM open side gets us at least 3. You could do so much out of a 2 back formation featuring willis and TH...i wish theyd use it god damn! or at least the damn coaching staff can think of something better than a damn bootleg. Horrible horrible call!! you should call a play you have worked on time and time again for the exact situation that nobody screws up...its sad watching us play sometime this article just came up on the main page btw http://www.buffalobills.com/news/news.jsp?news_id=2774 talks bout the play(or lack there of) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I would have loved to see a Jumbo split back formation with TH and willis, direct snap to one of them he pitches to the other for a toss sweep weakside, have the Oline block like its a run strongside then with that pitch BAM open side gets us at least 3. You could do so much out of a 2 back formation featuring willis and TH...i wish theyd use it god damn!or at least the damn coaching staff can think of something better than a damn bootleg. Horrible horrible call!! you should call a play you have worked on time and time again for the exact situation that nobody screws up...its sad watching us play sometime this article just came up on the main page btw http://www.buffalobills.com/news/news.jsp?news_id=2774 talks bout the play(or lack there of) 54733[/snapback] Which brings back to mind another problem this team has, and has had for several years now: there is a seriously !@#$ed-up tendency to try to mask offensive deficiencies with trick plays. When's the last time the Bills just lined up in a power running blow-everyone-off-the-line gain-two-yards set? Instead...hey, let's run a direct-snap WR-option fake end around tackle-eligible screen! Where's the bread-and-butter plays in this offense? Where's the crossing-pattern pass to Andre Reed? Where's the Butch Rolle goal-line touchdown play? Where's the plays that you know you're going to execute properly and well, because you've practiced them dozens of times, and know they're going to get you the result you want? Apparently, the basic bread-and-butter play isn't in the playbook...just the half-assed stevestojan trick play, for a team who's starting running back probably can't tie his shoes without the coach's help, and the rest of the offense ain't much brighter. Stop trying to be so !@#$ing fancy, Mularkey!!! Teach that box of rocks you call an offense to run some basic plays well, and run them..."trick plays" aren't trick plays when you have to rely on them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 I was at the game ... and what I saw was ... A number of times DB handed the ball off to Travis and every tim not a single Pats player was covering anyone but the ball carrier .. I even commented to my son that if Drew was to fake a handoff he had a easy 5 yards or more ... Now to be clear ... I NEVER want to see Drew running as a option but it WAS open all day. What I saw happen on the 4th down play ... Looked like TH screwed up and when the wrong way that left Drew no one to fake to PLUS the guard pulled .. thinking he was doing lord knows what .. and that left a hole in the middle for a defender to sack Drew ... and then he fumbled .... I don't fault Drew .... I guess if that is the BEST 4th down play the bills have then I don't blame him ... blame the personal. Bills gave the Pats a good game ... TV timeouts / pentalies / horride pass coverage was killing them all day ... Considering the defence played so-so (few tackles by the front line that I remember) a TD by the special teams / good pass protection (forget the last few minutes) and the Bills played well enought to win ... but are a team afraid to win ... looks like they are always waiting for the "bad" thing to happen. So that makes 3 straight loses in a row I have attended ... hard to swallow ! 54436[/snapback] You nailed it Travling Dad. That's exactly how it happened and exactly the coaching philosophy behind the call. Henry Absolutely blew it on the play. As did the Lineman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indy Dave Posted October 4, 2004 Share Posted October 4, 2004 If I had to guess, we were going for the end zone on that play. If Travis was supposed to get the ball, he would have turned around and been looking for Drew and wondering what the hell happened. That's not what took place. He went left and was either going to attempt to block somebody or release in the flats. Just from looking at Bledsoe's body language, I think the play was designed to go to the end zone. As usual, we are left to wonder about the ifs. If Travis didn't slip, we wouldn't have been in a fourth down spot. If we weren't offsides on the field goal, we would have kicked the game-tying field and not had to go for it on fourth down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts