KurtGodel77 Posted November 15, 2004 Share Posted November 15, 2004 Instead of dwelling on the negatives of last night's New England game, I may as well talk about the positives. Eric Moulds threw an excellent block on McGahee's 11 yard run. He blocked as well as an offensive lineman. That's a good thing, because our offensive linemen blocked as well as wide receivers. This isn't to take anything away from our offensive line's play. At some point in the game, one of the offensive linemen may have thrown a block. I also noticed that several of Drew's passes seemed to have been thrown in the general vicinity of Buffalo players. There was even one passing play where Drew took a quick look at someone other than Eric Moulds! The positives in this game weren't all on offense. On defense, there appeared to be times when some of the members of our secondary were attempting to cover Patriots' receivers. There was probably a play where the first Buffalo defender to make contact with a Pats RB actually made the tackle. But the highlight of this game was our punting unit. When you think about it, all our drives ended in a turnover, loss of the ball on downs, or a punt. Of those three options, the punt is the best, because it gives you the most field position. We need field position, because that way we get to watch the Patriots drive 70 - 80 yards instead of 30 - 40. Another positive from this game is that we got to hear nice things about Tom Brady, Corey Dillon, and the Patriots' coaching staff. It was good to hear those kinds of comments constantly and mindlessly repeated throughout the game by apparently braindead announcers. Honest. Not once did I hope for a total Patriots' collapse to make those announcers look like the pompous idiots they were. I really wasn't annoyed with them at all. Our own coaching effort was brilliant. Just brilliant. You have a guy like Ross Tucker, who is tough as nails, really smart and loves the game of football. He fits the profile of a Patriots player to a T, and the Patriots have an excellent offensive line. So why not bench Tucker (who was dominant last week against the Jets) in favor of the unsuccessful Lawrence Smith? Then there was Jerry Gray's brilliant effort against Charlie Weis. . . . Or take Tom Clements' decision to put the game in Bledsoe's hands. That one made a lot of sense, considering the succeess Bledsoe usually enjoys on the road, as well as against the Patriots. It's not like handing the ball to McGahee has ever gotten us anywhere. Our field goal unit didn't miss a kick or an extra point. I admit that their effort would have been more impressive had they actually attempted a kick or an extra point, but you have to take what positives are there. There is no way anyone can blame this loss on Ryan Lindell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted November 15, 2004 Share Posted November 15, 2004 Our field goal unit didn't miss a kick or an extra point. I admit that their effort would have been more impressive had they actually attempted a kick or an extra point, but you have to take what positives are there. There is no way anyone can blame this loss on Ryan Lindell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted November 15, 2004 Share Posted November 15, 2004 lmfao. This is gold simply gold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted November 15, 2004 Author Share Posted November 15, 2004 Thanks for the compliments! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJ1 Posted November 15, 2004 Share Posted November 15, 2004 Actually, I thought the coaches were auditioning for Comedy Central by coming up with the worst gameplan in the history of the NFL. I thought they were playing the Gillette for laughs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 15, 2004 Share Posted November 15, 2004 But the highlight of this game was our punting unit. When you think about it, all our drives ended in a turnover, loss of the ball on downs, or a punt. Of those three options, the punt is the best, because it gives you the most field position. We need field position, because that way we get to watch the Patriots drive 70 - 80 yards instead of 30 - 40. 119035[/snapback] Actually, you might view the punting unit as one of our biggest problems last night. Because Moorman was punting the ball so far, the Pats ended up having to move the football that much further to get to the end zone. All that did was give the Pats a huge edge in time of possession. Had Moorman shanked a few, the Pats would have had a much shorter field, and we would have gotten the ball back a lot faster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted November 16, 2004 Author Share Posted November 16, 2004 Actually, you might view the punting unit as one of our biggest problems last night. Because Moorman was punting the ball so far, the Pats ended up having to move the football that much further to get to the end zone. All that did was give the Pats a huge edge in time of possession. Had Moorman shanked a few, the Pats would have had a much shorter field, and we would have gotten the ball back a lot faster. 119154[/snapback] Yes, but all this would have led to a higher margin of victory for the Patriots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soljc Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 We need field position, because that way we get to watch the Patriots drive 70 - 80 yards instead of 30 - 40. 119035[/snapback] LMAO!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Yes, but all this would have led to a higher margin of victory for the Patriots. 119403[/snapback] Like that would have made a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted November 16, 2004 Author Share Posted November 16, 2004 Like that would have made a difference? 119458[/snapback] Mostly, because it looks better to lose 29-6 than it does 49-6. The first score has more style, at least if you're the losing team. If there's one thing we had yesterday, it was style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted November 16, 2004 Author Share Posted November 16, 2004 The thing about style is this: you have to look cool, indifferent to how things turn out. The Bills certainly looked that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 The thing about style is this: you have to look cool, indifferent to how things turn out. The Bills certainly looked that way. 119496[/snapback] Mularkey sure seems indifferent to the way things turned out..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KOKBILLS Posted November 16, 2004 Share Posted November 16, 2004 Mularkey sure seems indifferent to the way things turned out..... 119503[/snapback] In his Post Game comments, MM's comments were pretty much to the point...The whole "They did exactly what we thought they would, lined up the way we thought they would, etc..." comments were pretty black and white...I'm not sure if it was indifference or simple plain stated disgust...Maybe he was just a bit punch drunk...I don't know... I think it was telling how the ESPN guys said the Bills Coaching Staff was REAL up for the Game thinking the Bills had a legit shot to knock off the Patsies at NE...Talk about not knowing your Team yet! Maybe that's the last time MM gets the warm and fuzzies from a couple good Practices... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted November 16, 2004 Author Share Posted November 16, 2004 Mularkey sure seems indifferent to the way things turned out..... 119503[/snapback] If you watch Mularkey as a player, he was NEVER indifferent to the way things turned out. I have a hard time believing he left that part of himself behind when he went into coaching. Just because he doesn't do a lot of growling and snarling when he's interviewed by the media doesn't mean that he doesn't do this when he's in the locker room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KurtGodel77 Posted November 16, 2004 Author Share Posted November 16, 2004 Back in the early '90s, the 49ers had a QB controversy: they had to choose between Joe Montana (the greatest QB ever), or Steve Young, the QB with the highest single-season passer rating ever. I bet they thought they were special. Well, guess what: they're not the only ones to have had a QB controversy! We happen to be stirring up a little bit of controversy ourselves. On the one hand, you have a player whose three plays consisted of a sack, a fumble, and an interception. On the other, you have a QB who got a rating of 14. Now this is a QB controversy!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts