The Adrian Wilson Cruise missile strike

[Billistic]

Ask Alpha, I'm sure he can provide you a very short and concise explanation.

 

He's hopefully got plenty of other, better things to do.

 

This possibly won't be the last boat I miss.

[agilen]

Why are you guys still talking on this thread? Godwin's law was satisfied halfway through....

[Alphadawg7]

Very solid post. Trent's good games were SD, DEN, Seattle, KC, and Saint Louis. The rest were a combination of average games with a few comebacks sprinkled in and bad games. As you pointed out 3 of his better games came after the concussion so its not exactly the concussion that ended our season.

 

However I don't doubt that Trent was affected by the concussion because he just looked different at times and it wasn't just the fact that he was playing against better teams there were times where he just looked lost out on the field (Perfect example the Cleveland game).

 

Our downfall last year was harder competition, more tape on our slightly less vanilla play calling, and our overall lack of adjusting by our coaching staff over the course of the regular season. The concussion was just the cherry on top of a bad set of circumstances that led to a 2-8 record after a 5-1 start.

 

Good post, but I wouldnt count the St. Louis game as a "good game" for him...he was pretty bad off the first 3 quarters and he got bailed out in the 4th by other players making big plays and St. Louis unexplainably stopped bringing pressure.

 

I dont think the concussion was the problem...once he began to struggle and the schedule got tougher he seemed to lose his confidence and considering his first game back against SD he looked fine, I highly doubt the concussion had any affect on him the rest of the season. He was definitely shell shocked, but I think that was from him losing confidence once he started to struggle and we were showing signs of blowing a 6-2 start.

[Alphadawg7]

How would you explain that aberrant Chargers game? Did the post concussion blues take a week off? He fell apart on his own, Adrian Wilson didn't kill our season.

 

100% agree

[thebandit27]

With every post you make you sound less and less credible on the subject. It was you yourself who made the (correct) statement that OLmen make line calls. That would be the center. They make those line calls relative to the defensive fronts presented and the gap coverages required. I DID NOT say an OT has the responsibility to pick up blitzing inside LBs, I said that when the line call is made indicating such, that the OTs need to be aware of inside gap responsibility. That's why you often see them slide protecting to help a guard or pushing their man inside to tighten it up. Nor did I say that OTs aren't responsible for picking up OLBs on blitzes. Let me say it again:

 

The QB is responsible for reading a safety NOT the OT. As an aside, OTs don't even make line calls. But back to the point, Walker DID NOT have responsibility for Wilson on that play. That is an absolute fact. Edwards had responsibility for Wilson on that play and Edwards beat him. Walker WAS the closest OLmen, yes. But he was engaged with his assignment and blocked his man to the INSIDE as was his absolute responsbililty given the threat of the ILB blitz and in response to the line call made by the center when inside blitz was read. If you don't think shortest distance to the QB is relevant in football parlance what can I say?

 

But that's not what we're arguing. What I'm arguing is your absurd notion that OTs read safeties and then make audibles. That is so far from reality it's not surprising your feelings are hurt and you suddenly find your position indefensible.

 

By the way, MANY reasonable people don't expect an OLmen to pick up the blitzer closest to them. Often times that's the responsibility of an RB or TE or even a G that can kick out and get the job done depending on the pre-snap reads. Ironically, on the Wilson play, the Cards also showed Corner blitz from the weakside but our RB picked it up. Had the Cards NOT shown that threat, our RB MAY have been able to pick up Wilson. But lets take your scenario a little further. Suppose it WAS Walker's responsibility to pick up Wilson. What then? Well, let me clue you in: the man Walker was blocking then has a clear and SHORTER distance to Edwards than Wilson who had to go around Royal to get his angle.

 

I wasn't trying to be adversarial to your point about the relevance of Edwards getting rid of the ball vs. someone picking up a blitzer who creamed him. I was just making a point that Edwards made a good play and the right play.

 

As for passive/aggessive, I fail to see it. I was being aggressive. You decided to devolve the debate into 'your a Trent lover' load of crap. So in my best sandbox vernacular: you started it.

 

As for being holier than thou, I doubt it. I'm just putting years of experience out there for you to read or not. If it SOUNDS condescending I don't mean to be. Sometimes the two dimensional aspect of posts on a BB look a certain way. But I can't sit here and let someone try to tell me it's the OTs responsibility to read safeties and call audibles. Have to call BULLSH*T when I see it.

 

As for the other post, many pundits were wondering why Wilson wasn't flagged on the play when it happened. It clearly was in violation of the rules. I'll leave it to you to research why. I wouldn't want to come across as holier than thou.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

Cute that you'd try to play the whole thing off as though my feelings were hurt...yeah, I practically cried myself to sleep because you claimed to have superior knowledge!

 

I'll keep this short and sweet...as someone that openly questions my credibility, you should probably keep from blatantly contradicting yourself. I cite back-to-back posts:

 

Want to know the RTs first responsibility to that threat? A push to the inside. Protect the middle.

 

Immediately followed in your next response by:

 

I DID NOT say an OT has the responsibility to pick up blitzing inside LBs, I said that when the line call is made indicating such, that the OTs need to be aware of inside gap responsibility.

 

Then who exactly would be rushing the inside gaps that they're responsbile for picking up? That one NT that plays over the center in the Cardinals 3-4 alignment? Hah! Superior knowledge my hind-parts!

 

As for whether or not offensive tackles make line adjustments, you might want to strengthen your already superior knowledge (it that's even possible given it's magnitude) by doing a quick research of a 20+ year-old technique called "radar blocking" that's taught at even the pee wee level, and is centered around teaching each offensive lineman to adjust their blocking assignment given defensive alignments.

 

But hey, you go on thinking whatever it is that makes your argument convenient. I personally am slowly discovering that the off-season (since it's my first as a member of the board) is an ugly, ugly place here at TSW, where you and plenty of others seem to enjoy touting your collective genius and making global BS generalizations for the sake of sounding correct to yourselves.

 

So have fun with that...to each his own I suppose.

[K-9]

I'll :ph34r:keep this short and sweet...as someone that openly questions my credibility, you should probably keep from blatantly contradicting yourself. I cite back-to-back posts:

 

Want to know the RTs first responsibility to that threat? A push to the inside. Protect the middle.

 

Immediately followed in your next response by:

 

I DID NOT say an OT has the responsibility to pick up blitzing inside LBs, I said that when the line call is made indicating such, that the OTs need to be aware of inside gap responsibility.

Then who exactly would be rushing the inside gaps that they're responsbile for picking up? That one NT that plays over the center in the Cardinals 3-4 alignment? Hah! Superior knowledge my hind-parts!

 

No contradiction at all. BTW, nice parsing to take my post out of context. When the center (NOT the OT as you claim) makes his line call and sees two LBs threatening blitz (as was the case on the play in question), the OTs must be aware of inside gap penetration and attempt to take their man to the inside to tighten things up. Happens all the time. Helps the C and Gs with their gap control on the inside. That's what I meant. And you know it. I never suggested that an OT has to slide over the the center/guard gap and help out. But when two LBs and an NT are threatening the middle you are simply outmanned and THAT's why OTs have to be aware of the line call made. The Cards threatened BOTH ILBs plus a CB blitz on the weak side. It's called overpowering at the point of attack. Look it up sometime. The NT, both ILBs, both DEs, and a CB were threatening on that play. NOT just the NT in their 3-4 alignment. Pay attention.

 

As for whether or not offensive tackles make line adjustments, you might want to strengthen your already superior knowledge (it that's even possible given it's magnitude) by doing a quick research of a 20+ year-old technique called "radar blocking" that's taught at even the pee wee level, and is centered around teaching each offensive lineman to adjust their blocking assignment given defensive alignments.

 

Line adjustments are one thing, an OT, READING A SAFETY AND CALLING A LINE AUDIBLE IS ANOTHER. That was your original premise and the one I am correcting you on. But go ahead and throw more crap at the wall to cover it up if you must. Quite familiar with radar blocking, thank-you. And again, I'll go to the play against the Jets where Peters took a lot of unwarranted blame, just as you seek to blame Walker in this case. Peters saw the OLB blitz threat and tightened his gap relative to Dockery (again, moved toward the INSIDE) to help. Like Walker, it was not HIS responsibility to read the safety. Like Walker, Peters made the right play. Unlike Edwards, Losman DID NOT read the safety like he was supposed to and we all saw what happened.

 

 

But hey, you go on thinking whatever it is that makes your argument convenient. I personally am slowly discovering that the off-season (since it's my first as a member of the board) is an ugly, ugly place here at TSW, where you and plenty of others seem to enjoy touting your collective genius and making global BS generalizations for the sake of sounding correct to yourselves.

 

You are one to talk about making convenient arguments. Your argument was that Walker should have read the safety and audibled. That is simply wrong. You took that personally. Then you come back and try to make it into a 'you're a Trent lover' argument. Tell you what, if you can find me ONE credible source that shares your idea that OTs are responsible for reading safeties and calling line audibles while the QB is doing the same thing, I'll apologize.

 

If you think some of us simply come here and make "global BS generalizations for the sake of sounding correct to ourselves" you're wrong. Football is simply NOT that important to any of us here. I'm not that insecure anyway. You're free to read it or not. Take from it or not. Argue it or not. You seem to think that all of us need to be in the huddle to have a clue to what's going on during any given play. That's true to some extent. Especially in terms of playcall and assignments relative to the playcall that give it full context. On that I think we agree. But sometimes it's pretty simple. The play in question is one of those examples.

 

So have fun with that...to each his own I suppose.

 

It's more fun when the debates are based on solid knowledge. In this one case you were a bit lacking and objected to the criticism. If having a post get criticized makes this "an ugly, ugly place" during the offseason, we may have to PUP list you during the regular season. Oh, and I plan on having fun with it.

[Billistic]

Sounds like we've found a "non-traditional" couple here...

 

[K-9]

Sounds like we've found a "non-traditional" couple here...

 

 

You better call a timeout or I'll start to blather. You troll.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Billistic]

You better call a timeout or I'll start to blather. You troll.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

Geeze, bringing out the big artillery pieces over that? I even used an emoticon...

[nucci]

Geeze, bringing out the big artillery pieces over that? I even used an emoticon...

It's the off-season. We're all getting a bit restless.

[thebandit27]

No contradiction at all. BTW, nice parsing to take my post out of context. When the center (NOT the OT as you claim) makes his line call and sees two LBs threatening blitz (as was the case on the play in question), the OTs must be aware of inside gap penetration and attempt to take their man to the inside to tighten things up. Happens all the time. Helps the C and Gs with their gap control on the inside. That's what I meant. And you know it. I never suggested that an OT has to slide over the the center/guard gap and help out. But when two LBs and an NT are threatening the middle you are simply outmanned and THAT's why OTs have to be aware of the line call made. The Cards threatened BOTH ILBs plus a CB blitz on the weak side. It's called overpowering at the point of attack. Look it up sometime. The NT, both ILBs, both DEs, and a CB were threatening on that play. NOT just the NT in their 3-4 alignment. Pay attention.

 

 

 

Line adjustments are one thing, an OT, READING A SAFETY AND CALLING A LINE AUDIBLE IS ANOTHER. That was your original premise and the one I am correcting you on. But go ahead and throw more crap at the wall to cover it up if you must. Quite familiar with radar blocking, thank-you. And again, I'll go to the play against the Jets where Peters took a lot of unwarranted blame, just as you seek to blame Walker in this case. Peters saw the OLB blitz threat and tightened his gap relative to Dockery (again, moved toward the INSIDE) to help. Like Walker, it was not HIS responsibility to read the safety. Like Walker, Peters made the right play. Unlike Edwards, Losman DID NOT read the safety like he was supposed to and we all saw what happened.

 

 

 

 

You are one to talk about making convenient arguments. Your argument was that Walker should have read the safety and audibled. That is simply wrong. You took that personally. Then you come back and try to make it into a 'you're a Trent lover' argument. Tell you what, if you can find me ONE credible source that shares your idea that OTs are responsible for reading safeties and calling line audibles while the QB is doing the same thing, I'll apologize.

 

If you think some of us simply come here and make "global BS generalizations for the sake of sounding correct to ourselves" you're wrong. Football is simply NOT that important to any of us here. I'm not that insecure anyway. You're free to read it or not. Take from it or not. Argue it or not. You seem to think that all of us need to be in the huddle to have a clue to what's going on during any given play. That's true to some extent. Especially in terms of playcall and assignments relative to the playcall that give it full context. On that I think we agree. But sometimes it's pretty simple. The play in question is one of those examples.

 

 

 

It's more fun when the debates are based on solid knowledge. In this one case you were a bit lacking and objected to the criticism. If having a post get criticized makes this "an ugly, ugly place" during the offseason, we may have to PUP list you during the regular season. Oh, and I plan on having fun with it.

 

first off, i never took anything personally...that was your assumption.

 

and what i said in regard to the fact that you love trent (which is fine, he's your QB) was that just because you love the guy doesn't make wilson's hit dirty, as you claimed. i see that there was no response to my assertion that the league is over-protective of QBs, but I'll just assume that's because you couldn't think of "crap to throw at the wall" to cover your end of that argument.

 

here, since this is what you want to hear, i'll pander to you: you're right, the offensive tackle bears no responsibility for recognizing who he's supposed to block, nor does he need to think on his feet or recognize a blitz. there, feel better?

 

and by the way, tony boselli made line calls for jacksonville his entire career. i'm sure if he did it, others have to, but hey, maybe that's just more "crap for the wall".

 

as for this mythical PUP or whatever you're babbling about, put me on it if it means i don't have to deal with those that proclaim that their knowledge is "superior", and then go on to tell you that an NFL tackle making $5M/year that graduated from UC Berkely can't figure out if he's supposed to block a blitzer. and yes, go have fun with that.

[K-9]

Geeze, bringing out the big artillery pieces over that? I even used an emoticon...

 

Nah, I'm just screwin' with ya. Take it easy.

 

Sorry, but I don't do emoticons.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[K-9]

first off, i never took anything personally...that was your assumption.

 

Sure sounds like it. Lots of people get upset when they're called on their BS. You're not the first.

 

and what i said in regard to the fact that you love trent (which is fine, he's your QB) was that just because you love the guy doesn't make wilson's hit dirty, as you claimed. i see that there was no response to my assertion that the league is over-protective of QBs, but I'll just assume that's because you couldn't think of "crap to throw at the wall" to cover your end of that argument.

 

I don't care who the QB was. Trent, JP, Joe Dufek. The hit WAS illegal according to the rules. That's why he was fined. If you do the research you'd know exactly which rules were broken on the hit. Although, I do agree with your overall assertion that QBs are over-protected and if Edwards gets up perhaps there's no fine.

 

here, since this is what you want to hear, i'll pander to you: you're right, the offensive tackle bears no responsibility for recognizing who he's supposed to block, nor does he need to think on his feet or recognize a blitz. there, feel better?

 

Now you're just being childish. I've NEVER asserted that OTs bear no responsibility for whom they're supposed to block, understand line calls by the center, and think on their feet. I only maintained that an OT is not responsible for reading the safety and calling an audible as a result of his read of that safety. Walker was not responsible for Wilson. Period. Walker was responsible for the man he blocked, who would of, as I mentioned earlier, have had a shorter and more direct shot at Edwards than Wilson.

 

and by the way, tony boselli made line calls for jacksonville his entire career. i'm sure if he did it, others have to, but hey, maybe that's just more "crap for the wall".

 

Sure has the ring of more crap. There's a strategic reason why centers are tasked with the responsibility but that's another argument for another time. I'm sure Boselli "relayed" line calls made by the center and/or communicated back and forth (as ALL OLmen I've ever known have done) but I doubt that he trotted up to the LOS and then made the line calls.

 

as for this mythical PUP or whatever you're babbling about, put me on it if it means i don't have to deal with those that proclaim that their knowledge is "superior", and then go on to tell you that an NFL tackle making $5M/year that graduated from UC Berkely can't figure out if he's supposed to block a blitzer. and yes, go have fun with that.

 

The PUP is not mythical. It's the 'Physically Unable to Perform" list that NFL teams routinely use for players coming back from injury who are expected back but the team gets a roster break in the meantime. I was busting your chops. Sorry the joke was lost on you. I assumed you knew what the PUP list was.

 

And, once again, I've never maintained that Walker, the UC Berkely grad making $5M/year, isn't supposed to figure out who to block on any given play. Just that, ONCE AGAIN, on the play in question he bore NO responsibility for Wilson. Period.

You know, it's funny. You mentioned Peters getting pilloried (never by me BTW) for the play against Elam and the Jets and so I assume you thought that wasn't fair. I alluded to it a couple times as being the same type of situation as Walker against the Cards. And yet, while you seem to understand that Peters wasn't responsible for Elam, you don't give the same credit to Walker. I don't understand that logic.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Billistic]

Nah, I'm just screwin' with ya. Take it easy.

 

Sorry, but I don't do emoticons.

 

Yeah, I had that kinda figured. I'm not a real sensitive type, more of the scarred knuckles, if anything.

 

I'm on Pacific time, so you get to start your weekend first. But Monday morning, I get to sleep in longer.

[K-9]

Yeah, I had that kinda figured. I'm not a real sensitive type, more of the scarred knuckles, if anything.

 

I'm on Pacific time, so you get to start your weekend first. But Monday morning, I get to sleep in longer.

 

Scarred knuckles, huh? I suspected you weren't an upright walking creature. Just another knuckle dragger. Now I feel guilty for busting your chops so much.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[thebandit27]

GO BILLS!!!

 

my final response on the subject, since clearly our debate isn't going anywhere...

 

- i believe in my point, just as you believe in yours, and thus i argue my stance. if you want to interpret that as taking it personally, go right ahead, but you're completely mistaken. i enjoy debating and fully realize that none of it is personal (note my comment in my 2nd reply to you about the whole thing being in good fun). o-line play--because the nuances of it are subjective to those unfamiliar with the specific play-to-play details (like you and i)--is a polarizing subject, and thus it makes great fodder for debates.

 

- i find it humorous that in one sentence you'll mention that the hit was clearly illegal (for what reason you believe this you still refuse to say [other than to treat the situation the same as my better-half would "if you really knew me, you'd know already"]--unless your de facto reason for believing that is that wilson was fined), and then in the next sentence tell me that you agree wilson wouldn't have been fined if edwards got up...it sounds like your contending that the hit was illegal as long as edwards got hurt. if that's not what you're saying, then you're point remains quite unclear to me.

 

- the difference between the peters play vs. elam and the walker play vs. wilson is this: once peters recognized that the eminent pressure was coming from the safety, he shifted gears and made an attempt to block elam. he didn't get there, and losman got sacked, but at least the recognition was there. walker did no such thing. arizona lined up in a 3-man front. if you're going to contend that walker's responsibility is to take an inside position to help out the interior linemen, then whom--pray tell--are the interior linemen assigned to block? sure seems to me that the center would be assigned to the NT, peters to the RE, dockery to the RILB, butler to the LILB, and walker to the LE. however, when the ILB's drop off, walker's responsibility (just like peters' vs. the jets) would be to pass the LE off to butler and pick up the outside rusher. see, this is all speculative, because you and i will NEVER know precisely how the play was supposed to be blocked. however, looking at it, that's my interpretation, and it's not as though i'm just shooting from the hip...i have been in and around the game for over 20 years (which i hate having to mention, because it makes me sound like i expect my knowledge to be respected...and that's just not true, as i'm as willing as anyone to admit i don't know what goes on in the huddle)

 

- yes boselli did make the line calls in jacksonville. i spent some time looking for the article where tom coughlin talked about it, but all i could find was a ny post article about the giants' o-line and how OG chris snee makes the line calls for them...oh well, believe me if you want, or don't...i won't lose any sleep over it i promise.

 

- i'm well aware of the pup list in the real nfl, but this is a message board, and i sincerely doubt there's a similar list on here, thus my use of the term mythical.

 

and now i shall move on.

[Billistic]

Tony Boselli:

 

The Bills played the Jaguars when Tony was prime. The network had Bruce Smith "live miked" for the game (Monday Night?).

 

Tony just totally beat up poor Bruce all night long, like he was a rag doll. After one play, Tony dramatically pancaked Bruce, and Bruce was heard to say, "Was that really necessary?"

 

I think later on, Tony turned into some Geezus freak, or something.

[2003Contenders]

I think the impact of that play on Trent Edwards' psyche (or whatever you want to call it) has been horrendously overplayed. Remember that in his very next game after that concussion, he actually had arguably the best performance of his career against the SD Chargers. My suspicion last year was that Edwards' quality performances early on came against teams that not only ran 4-3 base fronts but also had never played against the second-year signal caller. The Jets, Dolphins, Patriots, and Browns had all played against Edwards the prior year and had a jump-start on his tendencies. Is it a coincidence that the Bills went 0-7 in those games? Let's hope that TE can make some major adjustments as he enters year 3.

[Jerry Jabber]

I agree about the hit. Adrian had his hat right underneath Trent's, and drove him to, and through the turf. Cost Wilson 25 grand, and no penalty called.

 

Agreed!

[Thoner7]

sorry, but the tackle has the ability to call a line audible if he sees the blitz coming and it's not accounted for in the blocking scheme.

 

in an off-season where this board has been so adamantly critical of last season's left tackle, i think maybe we can attribute an unblocked player to the other side of the line as well.

 

If the T picked up Wilson, then who is going to pick up the DE/LB now freed for said Ts switch to Wilson? Pick your poison, but the general rule of thumb is leave the longest route to the QB unblocked.