Magox Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 See, this is what I don't understand about Juaron, why I think he's a horrible coach. Your offense last year sucked horribly and was going 3 and out and you were getting killed in time of possession and your defense was really tired. So his conclusion is "Hmmm why don't we implement the hurry up offense so we can get off the field even faster!". You guys don't have the talent to do it I don't understand why you aren't trying to play smash mouth football with marshawn and jackson, or play a spread and give them some draws, screens and what have you, and have Evans and TO stretch the field while giving it to reed and Roscoe underneath. The hurry up is just a horrible idea for your offense right now. Thats just my two sense. They should just use it situationally, not just use it for the sake of using it. ya know, It was the first of 5 preseason games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUFFALOTONE Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Wood played worse IMO because he seemed to not know what he was doing at all times, mentally. There were times where he didn't know who to block, or got beaten outright. As I said in another post, the guy that knows exactly what he's doing but needs to add more strength in the weight room is a more NFL ready player than the guy who is mauling someone on one play and allowing his man into the backfield on the next because he's blocking the wrong player. I'm not intending to bash Wood, or to say that he's not ready, or to say that he won't be good. I love what I've seen from Eric Wood thus far, and he's got me really excited. I just couldn't stand to read the comments from people saying that Wood looked "amazing" while Levitre got "abused." It is ridiculous. Those comments are coming from people who don't know what they're talking about, and don't know what they're looking for. They didn't watch nearly enough to make a statement like that, and they probably only say that because they saw Levitre look like a school boy on that one play. Both Wood and Levitre are great prospects, but they both had their share of difficulties last night. It annoys me when people annoint Levitre as getting "abused" for a game just because they saw one bad play, while not noticing the other bad and good plays. Key phrase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattyT Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 You guys don't have the talent to do it I don't understand why you aren't trying to play smash mouth football with marshawn and jackson, They just don't have the run blocking ability to do this. Even when they had the biggest line in the league they couldn't get the job done. Thats just my two sense. Yikes! They should just use it situationally, not just use it for the sake of using it. Time will tell. You may be right. I think that TO adds the ability to convert a boatload more of the 3rd downs that the Bills have always struggled with. He's almost always good for 8-12 yards. Better to use him that way than stretching the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 See, this is what I don't understand about Juaron, why I think he's a horrible coach. Your offense last year sucked horribly and was going 3 and out and you were getting killed in time of possession and your defense was really tired. So his conclusion is "Hmmm why don't we implement the hurry up offense so we can get off the field even faster!". You guys don't have the talent to do it I don't understand why you aren't trying to play smash mouth football with marshawn and jackson, or play a spread and give them some draws, screens and what have you, and have Evans and TO stretch the field while giving it to reed and Roscoe underneath. The hurry up is just a horrible idea for your offense right now. Thats just my two sense. They should just use it situationally, not just use it for the sake of using it. I would expect you to post nonsense like this because you clearly are a Pats fans. I wouldn't want to see the Bills running no-huddle either if I was you. To state we don't have the talent to run it is just wishful thinking on your part - our offense has its weaknesses but they will be mitigated to the greatest extent possible *by* running the no huddle. As far as talent and weaponry goes, it is going to be hard for any defense to match up against us. Teams will have to rely on physical prowess to slow us down at the line of scrimmage, and running the no huddle makes it harder to do that, because defenses don't have time to breath or substitute players, much less call intricate plays before the snap. So I'll take your post as a good omen that you have legitimate reason to fear our no huddle. See you in week 1, !@#$. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthGeorgiaBillsFan Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 They just don't have the run blocking ability to do this. Even when they had the biggest line in the league they couldn't get the job done. That's because teams could load 8 in the box and double cover Lee. That is no longer a viable option. Time will tell. You may be right. I think that TO adds the ability to convert a boatload more of the 3rd downs that the Bills have always struggled with. He's almost always good for 8-12 yards. Better to use him that way than stretching the field. No, it is better to use T.O. to open up the offense, and to do that you have to send him deep frequently. If you don't, it becomes way too easy to sit on a slant route or out route or a hook and pick it off. The reason T.O. is effective on those short possession routes is because teams have to guard against him running deep. Any idiot corner back in the league can sit on a slant route and stop it if that was all he had to worry about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted August 10, 2009 Author Share Posted August 10, 2009 Fitzpatricks passes on the screens were terrible. WAY behind him, which loses the half second a WR needs to face the DB and make his move. I thought Roscoe did well with those brutal passes. I thought Fitz looked really bad last night. Oh don't get me wrong, Fitz had a heck of time hitting anyone inside of 2 yards from the line of scrimmage and his passes to Roscoe, and I forget the other guy he hit a few times behind the line were bad, but still Roscoe spends too much time dancing allowing defenders to surround him. He needs to get the ball, get forward and get low to avoid any big hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metal Man Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Oh don't get me wrong, Fitz had a heck of time hitting anyone inside of 2 yards from the line of scrimmage and his passes to Roscoe, and I forget the other guy he hit a few times behind the line were bad, but still Roscoe spends too much time dancing allowing defenders to surround him. He needs to get the ball, get forward and get low to avoid any big hits. Seems to me Lynch and Roscoe could both be a lot better served by picking a running lane and taking off a lot more quickly than they do now. I guess their thinking is 15 plays in a row of a couple yards or less followed by the occasional big break away play is worth it. The team would be a lot better off though if they took the ball and just moved forward and I agree for Roscoe it likely would help to avoid big hits if he would just start running instead of dancing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Chances are very good that the Bills will look great next week and everyone will be excited about the playoffs, then they will look horrible the next game and we will all be doomed, then they will look unbeatable half the third game and we will be going to the Super Bowl, and then they will look terrible the last game and we will be doomed again, all of which will mean zero going into the Monday Night game against the Patsies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEAST MODE BABY! Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Chances are very good that the Bills will look great next week and everyone will be excited about the playoffs, then they will look horrible the next game and we will all be doomed, then they will look unbeatable half the third game and we will be going to the Super Bowl, and then they will look terrible the last game and we will be doomed again, all of which will mean zero going into the Monday Night game against the Patsies. Did we look great at all last year in the preseason? Can't remember, but I have a feeling the answer is a "no." We were told that "This is just preseason" and it's "Nothing to worry about" IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans4e64 Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Key phrase. The idea that I think not knowing assignments is worse than being out-muscled is just my opinion. Saying Wood missed more blocks is not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metal Man Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Chances are very good that the Bills will look great next week and everyone will be excited about the playoffs, then they will look horrible the next game and we will all be doomed, then they will look unbeatable half the third game and we will be going to the Super Bowl, and then they will look terrible the last game and we will be doomed again, all of which will mean zero going into the Monday Night game against the Patsies. I think you pretty much nailed it with that post. Excellent description of a season in the life of a Bills fan. Seriously, you should write for WGR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WVUFootball29 Posted August 10, 2009 Author Share Posted August 10, 2009 Chances are very good that the Bills will look great next week and everyone will be excited about the playoffs, then they will look horrible the next game and we will all be doomed, then they will look unbeatable half the third game and we will be going to the Super Bowl, and then they will look terrible the last game and we will be doomed again, all of which will mean zero going into the Monday Night game against the Patsies. ain't that the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Cold Bruschi Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Yikes! Lol I'm a grammar nazi too, so good call Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrDawkinstein Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Did we look great at all last year in the preseason? Can't remember, but I have a feeling the answer is a "no." We were told that "This is just preseason" and it's "Nothing to worry about" IIRC. actually the opposite is true. we outplayed the Steelers and man-handled them in that preseason game AND the Steelers kept their starters in much longer than we did. as well as in another preseason game (I forget exactly which one). so Kelly is pretty close to being right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 See, this is what I don't understand about Juaron, why I think he's a horrible coach. Your offense last year sucked horribly and was going 3 and out and you were getting killed in time of possession and your defense was really tired. So his conclusion is "Hmmm why don't we implement the hurry up offense so we can get off the field even faster!". You guys don't have the talent to do it I don't understand why you aren't trying to play smash mouth football with marshawn and jackson, or play a spread and give them some draws, screens and what have you, and have Evans and TO stretch the field while giving it to reed and Roscoe underneath. The hurry up is just a horrible idea for your offense right now. Thats just my two sense. They should just use it situationally, not just use it for the sake of using it. You would think, as a New England fan (a team that runs the no huddle often enough), that you'd know the difference between "no-huddle" and "hurry-up". Just because a team does not huddle, that doesn't mean they're in a hurry up offense. All it means is that they call plays from the line of scrimmage, which accomplishes 3 main goals: (1) gives the offense a chance to read the defensive alignment prior to calling a play, (2) affords the offense the opportunity to go on a quick-count if the defense is tired, disorganized, or unprepared, and (3) does not allow the defense time to substitute. During last night's game, Edwards and the starting offense used, on average, 33 seconds of play clock time per play (at least that's what Kelso said on the radio prior to the 2nd half kickoff). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metal Man Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 You would think, as a New England fan (a team that runs the no huddle often enough), that you'd know the difference between "no-huddle" and "hurry-up". Just because a team does not huddle, that doesn't mean they're in a hurry up offense. All it means is that they call plays from the line of scrimmage, which accomplishes 3 main goals: (1) gives the offense a chance to read the defensive alignment prior to calling a play, (2) affords the offense the opportunity to go on a quick-count if the defense is tired, disorganized, or unprepared, and (3) does not allow the defense time to substitute. During last night's game, Edwards and the starting offense used, on average, 33 seconds of play clock time per play (at least that's what Kelso said on the radio prior to the 2nd half kickoff). That's true. I noticed a couple times when Trent was still in the game that he ran the play clock down to almost zero. If that is the norm in the regular season I suppose we can expect the Bill's D to be just as run down and pushed around in the 4th as always. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 That's true. I noticed a couple times when Trent was still in the game that he ran the play clock down to almost zero. If that is the norm in the regular season I suppose we can expect the Bill's D to be just as run down and pushed around in the 4th as always. I'm confused Metal...wouldn't you say that--supposing they run the play clock down throughout the game as they did last night--this would keep the defense off of the field longer and thus make them less tired in the 4th? Or are we misunderstanding each other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 Listen, I'm not some huge Parrish fan, but that play he made last night was sick. On a 2nd & 4 type of play, throwing a screen in his direction is a no brainer. Then once in a while have Trent pump one deep. And while I have no tangible evidence to back this up, Roscoe Parrish on a GOOD offense with GOOD gameplanning could be a 50-60 catch/year game breaker. Give him a QB like Manning or Brees or a creative OC and he could be electric. Unfortunately our squad is retarded and will never figure this out. Totally agree. Cut Evans too and find out what Bucky Brooks is up to. And get Bruce back on the d-line. Don't joke. Even at his age, I'll bet that Bruce would be an upgrade in obvious passing situations... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperKillerRobots Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 He was throwing strikes until he threw that interception. He missed the mark by a mile which tells me that he was either impeded in his throwing motion on his attempt or that there was a miscommunication between him and Evans, I happen to believe it was the latter. Either way, he threw the interception and that is unacceptable if he continued to do that on a consistant basis. I don't believe that will be a problem with him, it definitely hasn't been in the past, and I would expect that he will only improve in that area, but as you mentioned earlier, other than him being prone to injury, his confidence is what I hope that stays intact. If he doesn't get injured and he plays with confidence, I believe we will see a pro bowl level QB in Edwards. I agree that multiple INTs in a game are no good, but I'd rather see him throw 14 INTs and 27 TDs than 6 INTs and 16 TDs (those numbers by the way serve no other significance than to illustrate my point that I'd rather have him throwing the ball all over the place than playing conservative). See, this is what I don't understand about Juaron, why I think he's a horrible coach. Your offense last year sucked horribly and was going 3 and out and you were getting killed in time of possession and your defense was really tired. So his conclusion is "Hmmm why don't we implement the hurry up offense so we can get off the field even faster!". You guys don't have the talent to do it I don't understand why you aren't trying to play smash mouth football with marshawn and jackson, or play a spread and give them some draws, screens and what have you, and have Evans and TO stretch the field while giving it to reed and Roscoe underneath. The hurry up is just a horrible idea for your offense right now. Thats just my two sense. They should just use it situationally, not just use it for the sake of using it. All right, I'm sorry you can't see the obvious: Dick purposely had the offense go three and out and tire down the defense in preparation for just this season. You see, not other defense is better prepared to spend the entire game on the field! Seriously though, I gotta think they only use it situationally. I'm half thinking that they are making such a big deal of it because they want the Pats to come out trying to stop it in week one, while they pull out something else. Another way I could see it used would be solely in the first half or or second half, with a normal huddle offense the rest of the time. If they can learn how to mix it up, they could be really good. It's all about finding the unconditioned defender and exploiting them. Also, in your post you talk about using the spread offense and power running game as opposed to the no-huddle. I think the offense this year is going to be a mixed bag of no-huddle hurry-up, 2 TE runnning game, and 4-wide (mostly with a TE or RB in the slot). I think the strength of our offense is in the 3-wide two RB/RB, TE set and that's what will be used most. It seems to give us the best match-ups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincec Posted August 10, 2009 Share Posted August 10, 2009 And Trent? I will help ya Magox... Trent Good (in short wide open throws) Trent Bad throwing down field - He makes another bad decision throwing down field. The OL allowing pressure up the middle is irrelevant on the play, it was a very bad decision as he threw into triple coverage...the ball should never had been thrown there on that play regardless of the protection. Its only the first preseason game, and prior to that play Trent looked good and confident...however, how many terrible decisions like this can his ego take is my question. Can he play through it? Last year once his struggles got worse he clearly lost some swagger and confidence. There is plenty of time to get it together, but once again I wonder if he is capable of reading the D fast enough and effectively as he really struggled with that all season last year... Exactly my thoughts in watching that play. I know that it's a lot easier to relax and make good decisions when you're not worried about the pass rush, but realistically that's not going to be the case this year. If Edwards is going to have a good year he's going to have to make good, quick decisions in the face of some pressure. It wouldn't hurt if he developed a little more mobility inside the pocket either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts