My Meaningless Opinion

[Ramius]

You are awesome, dog. Did you even read what I wrote, or did you just stop one line in and respond?

 

I know you like to convolute things so that they support your argument, but believe it or not, football games are won and lost based on points, not yards.

 

You point to this #27 ranked defensive statistic as though it means something, when it really doesn't.

 

According to those rankings, the #5 defense in the league is giving up more points per game than 22 other defenses in the NFL. If that's the case, how can your beloved rankings mean anything substantive? Or does that not even register with you?

 

It's very simple: Buffalo held the best offense in the game (ranked so based on points AND your beloved yards) to 10 points (3 of which came off a turnover that gave NO the ball in the red zone) for 3+ quarters, and when their offense failed to get another first down for the rest of the game, the defense got tired and gave up rushing yards.

 

You can point to the numbers all you want, but try watching the game and comprehending the fact that the numbers don't come close to telling the whole story.

 

The bottom line with your argument is that you are blaming a loss in which the Bills' offense scored 0 points on a defense that did an admirable job against a juggernaut offense. And to boot, your justifying it by making reference to a defensive ranking that claims that the #5 overall defense in football can give up more points per game than 22 other defenses. Do you honestly believe that your argument holds water?

 

I'd say he's trolling, but dog's not smart enough. He's just a simple mind who doesn't understand much about the game of football.

[Guest dog14787]

You are awesome, dog. Did you even read what I wrote, or did you just stop one line in and respond?

 

I know you like to convolute things so that they support your argument, but believe it or not, football games are won and lost based on points, not yards.

 

You point to this #27 ranked defensive statistic as though it means something, when it really doesn't.

 

According to those rankings, the #5 defense in the league is giving up more points per game than 22 other defenses in the NFL. If that's the case, how can your beloved rankings mean anything substantive? Or does that not even register with you?

 

It's very simple: Buffalo held the best offense in the game (ranked so based on points AND your beloved yards) to 10 points (3 of which came off a turnover that gave NO the ball in the red zone) for 3+ quarters, and when their offense failed to get another first down for the rest of the game, the defense got tired and gave up rushing yards.

 

You can point to the numbers all you want, but try watching the game and comprehending the fact that the numbers don't come close to telling the whole story.

 

The bottom line with your argument is that you are blaming a loss in which the Bills' offense scored 0 points on a defense that did an admirable job against a juggernaut offense. And to boot, your justifying it by making reference to a defensive ranking that claims that the #5 overall defense in football can give up more points per game than 22 other defenses. Do you honestly believe that your argument holds water?

 

Saying our defense is playing well and making that determination by referring to 50 minutes of a 60 minute football game and then basing that assumption by comparing us to other teams that compared worse is something I don't buy.

[bizell]

Saying our defense is playing well and making that determination by referring to 50 minutes of a 60 minute football game and then basing that assumption by comparing us to other teams that compared worse is something I don't buy.

 

but lemme guess: you were one of the 'buyers' in the "TRENT EDWARDS IS BETTER THAN TOM BRADY: PROOF INSIDE" thread, right?

[Guest dog14787]

I'd say he's trolling, but dog's not smart enough. He's just a simple mind who doesn't understand much about the game of football.

 

Its funny how when someone doesn't have anything to say by way of debate, they resort to personal attacks.

[Ramius]

Its funny how when someone doesn't have anything to say by way of debate, they resort to personal attacks.

 

There's nothing to debate with a dimwit who didn;t actually watch the game and is trying to make assumptions based off of the final stat line.

[Guest dog14787]

but lemme guess: you were one of the 'buyers' in the "TRENT EDWARDS IS BETTER THAN TOM BRADY: PROOF INSIDE" thread, right?

 

On that particular game, yes I was because TE had that game in the bag. Brady should have been to little to late on that particular ball game.

[Dan]

On that particular game, yes I was because TE had that game in the bag. Brady should have been to little to late on that particular ball game.

How do you figure that? Trent was 15 for 25 with 212 yards. Brady was 39 of 53 with 378 yards. Trent was completely outplayed! You can't win with only 200 yards passing against a high scoring team like the Pats*.

[Guest dog14787]

There's nothing to debate with a dimwit who didn;t actually watch the game and is trying to make assumptions based off of the final stat line.

 

 

Like I said, nothing constructive to say so resort to name calling.

 

Saying our defense played well in a 27-7 loss pretty much speaks for itself.

[Ramius]

Like I said, nothing constructive to say so resort to name calling.

 

Saying our defense played well in a 27-7 loss pretty much speaks for itself.

 

Please break down how and when the defense sucked without resorting to any inane rankings and without using any of the final stat line. You're just like stuckincincy, didn't watch the game, yet feel like they can comment on the play of a unit or individual based off 1 stat line.

 

Also, since it was the defense's fault that we lost, please break down how the offense, which put up 0 points, played a good game.

[BillsWatch]

By harping on this fact, you're proving 1 of 2 things: Either you work as an ESPN analyst or you follow football because of your fantasy football teams. Either way, you obviously did not watch the game or did not understand what was going on.

 

+1

[Guest dog14787]

How do you figure that? Trent was 15 for 25 with 212 yards. Brady was 39 of 53 with 378 yards. Trent was completely outplayed! You can't win with only 200 yards passing against a high scoring team like the Pats*.

 

 

Dan, I think its you who wanted to start an argument or why even bring up other posts from a totally different thread.

[thebandit27]

Saying our defense is playing well and making that determination by referring to 50 minutes of a 60 minute football game and then basing that assumption by comparing us to other teams that compared worse is something I don't buy.

 

I'm stifling my frustration in an attempt to figure out if you're simply trying to get under people's skin or if you really don't ever consider what actually occurred on the field.

 

Why will you not acknowledge that the offense scored ZERO POINTS THE ENTIRE GAME, and that once they failed to get a first down in the entire 4th quarter, that was when the defense began to give up rushing yards (and subsequently touchdowns)? This is an extremely relevant point which you seem to want to ignore.

 

But hey, whatever man. I guess you think scoring zero points on offense and hanging your defense out to dry after 3-1/2 quarters of inspired play is acceptable. That being the case, I guess I see where you're coming from.

[Dan]

Dan, I think its you who wanted to start an argument or why even bring up other posts from a totally different thread.

No, you said the defense played poorly. I simply refuted that. Then you tried, rather unsuccessfully, to argue your point that the defense did indeed play poorly. I continued to refute your statements.

 

Then you brought up Edwards' great performance in the season opener. I simply refuted that as well.

 

 

I actually read this thread, initially, because I enjoy RR's insights on the games. I was just disheartened to see someone missing the forest for the trees, again. And felt it warranted a response.

[stuckincincy]

Ramius, why would I do that, I have all the cartoon characters like you I need right here on this board.

 

I have a right to my own opinion and I posted as much, I knew going into this game we had to stop the run to win and we didn't and the Bills lost. So get real or find an argument that even makes sense.

 

Well, you have a history of hunting around so as to quickly post in a topic, in seeming hope that one of your targeted members' posts gets pushed off, unread, and perhaps get buried.

 

That's my right to my own opinion speaking. Since we agree to get real.

[Guest dog14787]

I'm stifling my frustration in an attempt to figure out if you're simply trying to get under people's skin or if you really don't ever consider what actually occurred on the field.

 

Why will you not acknowledge that the offense scored ZERO POINTS THE ENTIRE GAME, and that once they failed to get a first down in the entire 4th quarter, that was when the defense began to give up rushing yards (and subsequently touchdowns)? This is an extremely relevant point which you seem to want to ignore.

 

But hey, whatever man. I guess you think scoring zero points on offense and hanging your defense out to dry after 3-1/2 quarters of inspired play is acceptable. That being the case, I guess I see where you're coming from.

 

 

Give me a break, I watched the game and I understand the significance of only being down by 3 in the fourth quarter and what the offenses inability to score meant so get over yourselves.

 

The saints D and offense faced the same dilemma and they prevailed. All this argument because I voiced my opinion that the defense did not play well is a little over doing it don't you think. Especially considering all the stats and facts glaring back at you.

[Guest dog14787]

Well, you have a history of hunting around so as to quickly post in a topic, in seeming hope that one of your targeted members' posts gets pushed off, unread, and perhaps get buried.

 

That's my right to my own opinion speaking. Since we agree to get real.

 

 

What????

[Ramius]

Give me a break, I watched the game and I understand the significance of only being down by 3 in the fourth quarter and what the offenses inability to score meant so get over yourselves.

 

The saints D and offense faced the same dilemma and they prevailed. All this argument because I voiced my opinion that the defense did not play well is a little over doing it don't you think. Especially considering all the stats and facts glaring back at you.

 

Ok. Since you actually watched the game and still arrived at your conclusion, then my name calling was justified.

[DC Tom]

The saints D and offense faced the same dilemma and they prevailed.

 

What? Are you high?

[Guest dog14787]

No, you said the defense played poorly. I simply refuted that. Then you tried, rather unsuccessfully, to argue your point that the defense did indeed play poorly. I continued to refute your statements.

 

Then you brought up Edwards' great performance in the season opener. I simply refuted that as well.

 

 

I actually read this thread, initially, because I enjoy RR's insights on the games. I was just disheartened to see someone missing the forest for the trees, again. And felt it warranted a response.

 

 

Are you losing it, and you say this happened in this thread and it wasn't you that brought this up.

[Guest dog14787]

What? Are you high?

 

I'm fixing to be.

 

The Saints defense stopped what In my opinion is allot of offensive fire power, whats so hard to understand.

[Dan]

Are you losing it, and you say this happened in this thread and it wasn't you that brought this up.

Post #43, bizell brings it up.

 

Post #46, you stated TE had the game in the bag.

 

Post #47, I refuted that he had it in the bag based on his stats from the game.

 

So by my count (granted I didn't use a calculator to do the math), I was the 3rd person to bring TE's performance in that game into the discussion.

[Guest dog14787]

Post #43, bizell brings it up.

 

Post #46, you stated TE had the game in the bag.

 

Post #47, I refuted that he had it in the bag based on his stats from the game.

 

So by my count (granted I didn't use a calculator to do the math), I was the 3rd person to bring TE's performance in that game into the discussion.

 

 

OK, I see what your saying, i thought you brought it up, my bad.

 

and you know what, now I have a buzz, the defense played well yesterday...

[Guest dog14787]

Ok. Since you actually watched the game and still arrived at your conclusion, then my name calling was justified.

 

 

Fair enough... lets give some credit where credit is due I suppose...

 

I've been successfully tranquilized, beat down and subdued.( for now)

[Fan in Chicago]

I'm fixing to be.

 

The Saints defense stopped what In my opinion is allot of offensive fire power, whats so hard to understand.

 

[Guest dog14787]

 

 

Let me guess, you expected our offense to be scoreless.

[Cookiemonster]

The good thing was I got to watch the game @ Jimmy's Tavern in Herndon VA w/ over 300 rabid Bills fans. I got to meet Scott Norwood and Charley Taylor (Redskins WR, Pro Football Hall of Fame Class of '84, former NFL all time leading receiver); both were very pleasant and took the time to chat w/ anyone.

 

The bad thing was that I got to watch the game. Ugh! I give the Saints props for balancing out their offense to the point where they were able to pull away from the Bills late in the game by wearing down the defense. A lot of that wearing down was due to the inept offense. Alex Van Pelt just had no answer for Gregg Williams' defense in this one. Trent Edwards started off okay, doing a decent job of rolling out to avoid the rush and actually having a few moments where he read the defense pre snap and adjusted. But, as the game wore on, his performance just tanked. He forced passes into tight coverage (as he did on the INT), overthrew a wide open Terrell Owens on a play that probably would've gone for a score, and regressed back to his old self, looking to check down far too often.

 

My big question for Van Pelt would be why did you not do more to get Fred Jackson going in this game, especially when the game's outcome was still in question and he was doing a good job of picking up tough yards? No, instead, you wait 'til after the defense wears down to get Jackson more carries. Sigh. What fun this week is going to be for the coaches, huh? I am reminded of a tune from Prince, actually it's the title of his 4th album........Controversy.

 

I think the Bills were a bit too worried 'bout establishing some sort of passing game and also trying to get the wideouts more involved. Well, Josh Reed did make some gutsy plays, but the outside guys just didn't get it done. Lee Evans had another bad experience over the middle (maybe the Bills should just resign to keeping him to the outside to run his beloved "9" routes) while Terrell Owens missed the opportunity to come up w/ the catch that became an INT. Now, on that one, grant you, Edwards threw a bad pass. But that is still one Owens can come up w/ and has come up w/ in the past. Is it time now for the drama that everyone from some Bills fans to most of the media is craving for? I hope not, but I'm sure that people will work hard to engineer it.

 

The offensive line. You ain't kiddin', "offensive"! What a putrid performance by all. Eric Wood looked awful; it was almost like that was a hazing instead of a game. Andy Levitre also looked bad (Sedrick Ellis made him look particularly bad on the one play that resulted in a sack). The tackles? Well, Jon Scott wasn't as bad as Demetrius Bell, but niether guy could be proud of their performance. Too many penalties and not enough protection. Granted, they did have to face a very good pair of pass rushers in Charles Grant and Will Smith, so for that reason I am not going to condemn either guy. Let's just say they got worked over by some very good players yesterday.

 

I thought the D line played well. Ryan Denney and Chris Kelsay had some nice plays in this game, and that's not to mention the solid performance of Aaron Schobel. Inside, I thought Kyle Williams continued to show that he's not as bad as many on this board claim he is while Marcus Stroud was good also. One thing w/ Stroud that I've noticed though is the fact that he can be taken out on plays going away from him. Stretch runs, misdirection plays, any of the stuff that calls for him to be doubled and kicked to a particular side, he has problems beating those double teams. When they try to double him on runs going inside, he eats that up like candy. The outside stuff is a problem though, and it allows for the O linemen to get to the 2nd level and make the blocks to spring the RBs. On Thomas' first TD run in the 4th, the block that FB Heath Evans (he had a very good game) made was certainly key to Thomas getting sprung, but the way Stroud was doubled allowed for the Saints line to get on the LBs, so that when Evans made his block, Thomas had a gaping hole to hit.

 

I thought the linebackers struggled in terms of getting to the outside to stop the run, but also showed the usual deficiencies in terms of pass coverage (Jeremy Shockey got the better of Kawika Mitchell on a play that went for a big gain). W/ the D line eventually wearing down late, the LBs just got manhandled as the Saints guys got to 'em to clear the way for the running game.

 

As for the secondary, Leodis McKelvin got hurt early and didn't return, but Drayton Florence did a very good job of replacing him. Also, Terrence McGee did a good job after being beat deep on the Saints' opening TD drive. Was that Donte Whitner coming over to knock down a potential TD play later in the game? Really? Whitner??? Also, those of you who blasted the drafting of Reggie Corner last year, you should be grateful that he's in the lineup. He provided some nice coverage out there, and was a big part of why Drew Brees was held to under 200 yards passing for the first time in 23 games. Take a bow, secondary. You earned it.

 

Special teams came up w/ the play of the game for the Bills in Denney's TD on the fake. But, there were also the penalties that are becoming far too common w/ this group in 2009. Bobby April needs to light a fire under the special teams and get this stuff corrected. Now.

 

Last but certainly not least, the coaching. Aaaaaaargh!! Not only do you not challenge the Josh Reed play, but then you PUNT on the next play instead of going for 4th and 1? It seems like there's a critical point in many Bills games where the tide turns, usually due in part to a poor coaching decision. This could have been the point yesterday. You showed no faith in your offense, and you put your defense, which by then was exhausted, right back on the field. And, the Bills are still having to waste timeouts. How many more years does Jauron need to get the team to the point where they can run the offense in clutch situations w/out the need to waste timeouts? Sad thing is, he'll probably get as many of those years as he needs.

 

Okay, so the Bills now sit @ 1-2. As G. Host said to me @ the end of the game yesterday, "does that mean we're as good as the Steelers?" I don't know if I'd go that far, but both teams have the same record @ this point in the year. Things can continue to slide downward, or they can go upward. It's up to the coaches to right the ship. Good luck, and Go Bills!

We have exactly the same record, and we lost a division game on the road, and that my freinds, is where the

comparison ends.