DeLuca1967 Posted October 16, 2006 Author Share Posted October 16, 2006 i was waiting for delucas post today. You had to know it was coming. And, while he may be the Al Sharpton of the message board, he has gotten ample ammunition from the bills the last two games. JP will continue to get criticized until thing turn in the right direction. The oline was putrid yesterday, causing losman to duck more bad mojo than a congressional page. The game yesterday was brutal to watch. JP made some really nice plays, some poor decisions (the huge sack after kick return was brutal). He also had that Garo Yepremian moment that occured when he was sacked and yet still tried to apparently get rid of the ball while going down. The receiver has two choices--run the route long enough to pcik up the first down, or run a short route and get the y-a-c as josh reed did yesterday in the second half. deluca, we went back and forth last week on the "gut check" issue. the bills failed yesterday. 806299[/snapback] Again. Are the Bills setting up with only one wideout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Again. Are the Bills setting up with only one wideout? 806805[/snapback] absolutely not. but it's a team game, and the qb is only one part of the team. when you figure pressure on the qb was incredible yesterday, you figure the line has broken down. when you progress through the reads and you do have time, you figure the coverage is tight. when you have pressure on the qb, and the qb goes through the progression, and any receiver or tight end is looking to get the ball short of the first down marker, the only logical conclusion is they figure they can pick up the first down with yards after catch. i concur losman looked bad yesterday. the line and receivers did as well. your theory is ipso facto the qb blows. two years and counting our line has broken down during far too many games. when losman blows many games behind a functioning line, i'll hop on the bandwagon with you. for now, i'm just frustrated that they sucked yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLuca1967 Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 absolutely not. but it's a team game, and the qb is only one part of the team. when you figure pressure on the qb was incredible yesterday, you figure the line has broken down. when you progress through the reads and you do have time, you figure the coverage is tight. when you have pressure on the qb, and the qb goes through the progression, and any receiver or tight end is looking to get the ball short of the first down marker, the only logical conclusion is they figure they can pick up the first down with yards after catch. i concur losman looked bad yesterday. the line and receivers did as well. your theory is ipso facto the qb blows. two years and counting our line has broken down during far too many games. when losman blows many games behind a functioning line, i'll hop on the bandwagon with you. for now, i'm just frustrated that they sucked yesterday. 806900[/snapback] Don't you think over the past three years that Losman at some point should have shown he can take the bull by the horns. Look at Leinart tonight. Starts off 5 for 5 with a TD against the same defense that made Losman look like a child. Losman over his three years has never looked that good at any point. I guess for you and others it will always be someone's fault other than Losman's. For me? The Lions game wasn't another nail in the coffin. It ws the last shovel of dirt on the grave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nixon Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Matt Leinart 3rd down conversion rate would be 75% in Buffalo, if we'd have drafted him....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Risin Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Matt Leinart 3rd down conversion rate would be 75% in Buffalo, if we'd have drafted him....... 807001[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cåblelady Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 For me? The Lions game wasn't another nail in the coffin. It ws the last shovel of dirt on the grave. 806990[/snapback] With you inside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Again. If we were talking one or two times this season you may have a point. It happens way too often to keep beleiving it's the wide receivers fault all the time. It goes to Losman's inability to check down. If the first option isn't there he dumps it off to the safety valve. He doesn't go option 1 - option 2 - option 3 - dump off. He goes option 1 - dump off or sack. He just doesn't process the information fast enough in his head to get the job done. 805480[/snapback] You know this because you know the coverage, the progressions, and what each offensive player's responsibility is in each play, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift Sylvan Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Don't you think over the past three years that Losman at some point should have shown he can take the bull by the horns. Look at Leinart tonight. Starts off 5 for 5 with a TD against the same defense that made Losman look like a child. Losman over his three years has never looked that good at any point. I guess for you and others it will always be someone's fault other than Losman's. For me? The Lions game wasn't another nail in the coffin. It ws the last shovel of dirt on the grave. 806990[/snapback] On this game he went 5 for 5 at first http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playbyplay/N...0050911_HOU@BUF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLuca1967 Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 On this game he went 5 for 5 at first http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playbyplay/N...0050911_HOU@BUF 807048[/snapback] And when I think great defenses? I think Bears, Ravens and Texans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeLuca1967 Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 Matt Leinart 3rd down conversion rate would be 75% in Buffalo, if we'd have drafted him....... 807001[/snapback] Hell! I'd be happy if Leinart was here just to throw a ball beyond the first down marker once in a while on third down. I know that would be hard since the Bills seemingly only send one receiver out in a pattern on third downs and that receiver always stops short of the marker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Hell! I'd be happy if Leinart was here just to throw a ball beyond the first down marker once in a while on third down. I know that would be hard since the Bills seemingly only send one receiver out in a pattern on third downs and that receiver always stops short of the marker 807512[/snapback] you're convinced leinart is the next big thing, and 5 for 5 at first probably is a good indication he's got all the skills. when you factor in it was againt the bears, it's almost a certainty. your problem is you deal in extremes. always. anyone not willing to acknowledge losman is definitely not the answer is a follower. anyone not willing to acknowledge levy is a puppet gm is buying the company line. anyone who can't acknowledge that losman is the only reason we don't pick up enough 3rd downs on pass plays is wrong. anyone who can't see matt leinart was the better choice is missing the big picture. i think he punched his ticket to the h-o-f with those first 5 passes. team game, team result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts