Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 I still don't understand how everyone can agree that the Quarterback and both guards are amongst the worst in the league, one OT is having a sub par year and the other OT is a 7th round draft choice just learning his trade yet somehow we blame the OC for offensive futility. What exactly is he supposed to do ? It's the decision making. But if this defense continues to play at a high level AND they add a good QB/a guard then it might not matter who the coach is.
tom webster Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 It's the decision making. But if this defense continues to play at a high level AND they add a good QB/a guard then it might not matter who the coach is. Conservatism, creativity, decision making. It's all so over rated and overblown. You get quality personnel and you can run four plays over and over again, say like the K gun offense. Your quarterbavknis terrified and your defense is great. If anything, they should be even more conservative. By the way Tank, every time I see you mention the Bills D, I think of your " they will be historically bad" comment. Sorry.
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Conservatism, creativity, decision making. It's all so over rated and overblown. You get quality personnel and you can run four plays over and over again, say like the K gun offense. Your quarterbavknis terrified and your defense is great. If anything, they should be even more conservative. By the way Tank, every time I see you mention the Bills D, I think of your " they will be historically bad" comment. Sorry. You win some you lose some.
Johnny DangerFace Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) Conservatism, creativity, decision making. It's all so over rated and overblown. You get quality personnel and you can run four plays over and over again, say like the K gun offense. Your quarterbavknis terrified and your defense is great. If anything, they should be even more conservative. By the way Tank, every time I see you mention the Bills D, I think of your " they will be historically bad" comment. Sorry. This is the NFL, its a produce or get out type of league. Yea we have interior o-line issues and a terrible QB. What is hackett doing to help? That's my question, because his job is to make the most of what he has. Instead of making excuses, are you going to say he is helping? Do you think this is the most he can get out of this offense? Our interior o line is bad? Buffalo runs the ball right up the middle more than any other team in the league besides the raiders. 65% of our runs are up the middle, compared to a league average of 52%. Only 10% of our runs are outside the tackles, compared to a league average of 22%. Hackett has 2 years of excuses now (valid or not), and this offense is doing nothing. I'd rather take a coordinator that can get something out of this group, than a coordinator who needs a good qb and a good oline. Because any offense is going to produce with those two positions settled. Seriously. What good is an offensive coordinator if he cant get anything out of his offense and needs a good quarterback and good oline? We have had better offenses with less talent. Watkins, Woods, Freddy, Spiller? Our o line even has some solid pieces. EDIT: bottom line, no one is saying hackett is the reason this offense sucks. But he isn't doing anything whatsoever to help, which is his job. Edited December 17, 2014 by Johnny DangerFace
TrueBlueGED Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Conservatism, creativity, decision making. It's all so over rated and overblown. You get quality personnel and you can run four plays over and over again, say like the K gun offense. Your quarterbavknis terrified and your defense is great. If anything, they should be even more conservative. By the way Tank, every time I see you mention the Bills D, I think of your " they will be historically bad" comment. Sorry. I will completely agree that both Hackett and Marrone would look a whole lot smarter if they had a good-great QB, and the same can be said for the line. However, at least some of the line is on Marrone--Joe Buscaglia reported earlier in the year that part of the reason we signed/drafted large offensive linemen is those are the type that Marrone wants. So we end up with guards that can't pull (IMO helps explain Numark's criticism about the lack of outside running) and can't get downfield on screens. If Buscaglia's report is accurate, Marrone has to shoulder some of that blame. This also goes into why Spiller has been so ineffective; I always have a problem with coaches who insist on "their way" even if the personnel doesn't match up. Another example I can give is playcalling on short down and distance. If our offensive line is overmatched (and it is), isn't lining up in a big formation and asking your guys to beat their guys one-on-one about the last thing in the world you'd want to do? Our guys *can't* do that, yet they're asked to. It hasn't worked, yet the approach also hasn't changed. And I think we can all agree Marrone is a buffoon when it comes to game management. Having said all of that, I rarely leave a game thinking "wow, they were totally unprepared for that one" so they can't all be completely incompetent. The conservatism will always kill me though, especially when your defense is playing at a level that allows you to make mistakes and still get by.
Andrew Amerk Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 The fact that anyone is advocating for Cutler is blowing my mind.
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 The fact that anyone is advocating for Cutler is blowing my mind. He's still better than what we have. If he had a great defense like this one he'd likely be way better.
Andrew Amerk Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 He's still better than what we have. If he had a great defense like this one he'd likely be way better. I don't see it. Cutler has/had two of the best WR in the game between Marshall and Jeffery, and probably the best all purpose back in Forte, and couldn't get it done. Cutler 2014 = Orton 2014
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 I don't see it. Cutler has/had two of the best WR in the game between Marshall and Jeffery, and probably the best all purpose back in Forte, and couldn't get it done. Cutler 2014 = Orton 2014 Cutler, despite being sacked the seventh most times in the league, is still posting big numbers: 3,640 yards = 9th in the league 28 touchdowns = 7th in the league 66.1% completions = 7th in the league 347 completions = 5th in the league Obviously the big stat is first in turnovers in the league... But that'll happen when your defense gives up the most points of any defense in the league. He's being asked to do everything for that team. He hasn't done that well. We don't need him to do everything. We need him to make some plays here and there and play well. He's never had a defense nearly as the one we have. Obviously his turnover numbers are going to contribute to his team giving up so many points, but I still think that atrocious defense is the reason for so many turnovers. Well that and the sacks.
TrueBlueGED Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Cutler's not taking us to the promised land, but I think he can get us to the playoffs. And, sadly, I'm not sure I see a better option.
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) Cutler's not taking us to the promised land, but I think he can get us to the playoffs. And, sadly, I'm not sure I see a better option. There really isn't many better options. It depends on who becomes available. Not counting the draft the guys that interest me and could become available are Cutler, Eli Manning (highly doubt he actually becomes available), RG3 (injuries scare the ###### out of me but I still really like him), Nick Foles (still think the Eagles view him as their future) and pretty much nobody else. I doubt Colin Kaepernick goes anywhere and I'm not sure he'd be worth it. Other than that? Sam Bradford, I guess. But I don't think we can trust his health. I'd really prefer to get a guy who stays healthy and plays at a high level which is really only Manning and Cutler from that list. I don't think Cutler would "take us to the promised land" but our QB doesn't need to do that, really. We need a guy who plays at a high level and the defense to continue this play. Get the QB, pickup Mike Iupati and then add depth all over the field. Edited December 17, 2014 by Tank
TrueBlueGED Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 There really isn't many better options. It depends on who becomes available. Not counting the draft the guys that interest me and could become available are Cutler, Eli Manning (highly doubt he actually becomes available), RG3 (injuries scare the ###### out of me but I still really like him), Nick Foles (still think the Eagles view him as their future) and pretty much nobody else. I doubt Colin Kaepernick goes anywhere and I'm not sure he'd be worth it. Other than that? Sam Bradford, I guess. But I don't think we can trust his health. I'd really prefer to get a guy who stays healthy and plays at a high level which is really only Manning and Cutler from that list. I don't think Cutler would "take us to the promised land" but our QB doesn't need to do that, really. We need a guy who plays at a high level and the defense to continue this play. Get the QB, pickup Mike Iupati and then add depth all over the field. I guess I just don't think Cutler is going to cut down on the turnovers just because he has a defense. Some of them may be from trying to do too much, but he's just not great at reading a defense and puts too much faith in his arm. I have zero interest in Nick Foles. Complete product of Chip Kelly, and he wasn't even playing well this year before his injury.
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 I guess I just don't think Cutler is going to cut down on the turnovers just because he has a defense. Some of them may be from trying to do too much, but he's just not great at reading a defense and puts too much faith in his arm. I have zero interest in Nick Foles. Complete product of Chip Kelly, and he wasn't even playing well this year before his injury. I just don't think you put up 27 TDs and 2 INTs without legit talent. Foles was getting nigh grades going into the draft for a reason. He's got potential. The highest of the guys mentioned (other than RG3 maybe). These guys are all going to have flaws. Big ones, too. But we NEED to do something this offseason at the position. Inexcusable if they don't.
TrueBlueGED Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 I just don't think you put up 27 TDs and 2 INTs without legit talent. Foles was getting nigh grades going into the draft for a reason. He's got potential. The highest of the guys mentioned (other than RG3 maybe). These guys are all going to have flaws. Big ones, too. But we NEED to do something this offseason at the position. Inexcusable if they don't. Well, he came back down to earth this season. All of his numbers were down a lot, and I think this year was more representative of his ability than last season. He's not terrible, but I really don't see him as much of an upgrade over Orton. If you believe last year was a better representation of his talent than this year, then sure...I just don't see it that way. I'll gladly take Eli, but no way is he traded. Bradford is always hurt, and not very good anyway. If the big plan is bringing him in, I will not be excited. Said earlier I'd take a flier on RG3, and I definitely would prefer him over the rest of the list if he's available for a reasonable price. Shanahan may have ruined him, but his upside is worth taking a shot on.
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Well, he came back down to earth this season. All of his numbers were down a lot, and I think this year was more representative of his ability than last season. He's not terrible, but I really don't see him as much of an upgrade over Orton. If you believe last year was a better representation of his talent than this year, then sure...I just don't see it that way. I'll gladly take Eli, but no way is he traded. Bradford is always hurt, and not very good anyway. If the big plan is bringing him in, I will not be excited. Said earlier I'd take a flier on RG3, and I definitely would prefer him over the rest of the list if he's available for a reasonable price. Shanahan may have ruined him, but his upside is worth taking a shot on. I think this year is more representative of Foles, but I'm willing to bet he ends up somewhere in between this year and last if he gets time. Bradford is actually very good but never healthy. Not worth the risk. I also have heard that there's no way he leaves St. Louis. Likely back on one to two years for cheap to prove himself. He's got the talent but I don't want him here.
Andrew Amerk Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Cutler, despite being sacked the seventh most times in the league, is still posting big numbers: 3,640 yards = 9th in the league 28 touchdowns = 7th in the league 66.1% completions = 7th in the league 347 completions = 5th in the league Obviously the big stat is first in turnovers in the league... But that'll happen when your defense gives up the most points of any defense in the league. He's being asked to do everything for that team. He hasn't done that well. We don't need him to do everything. We need him to make some plays here and there and play well. He's never had a defense nearly as the one we have. Obviously his turnover numbers are going to contribute to his team giving up so many points, but I still think that atrocious defense is the reason for so many turnovers. Well that and the sacks. Cutler was able to put up his big numbers earlier in the season. Which is typical for him. When the season goes on, and games start to matter, he flakes. He's not who I would want to trust the team in. I'd prefer RG3 or Locker. No on Bradford and Foles.
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 You'd prefer Locker over Foles and Bradford? Take a few minutes in the box to think about your sins. Guy has never shown the ability in the tiny stints he's been able to stay healthy. He's nothing in this league other than an insurance nightmare.
Andrew Amerk Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 You'd prefer Locker over Foles and Bradford? Take a few minutes in the box to think about your sins. Guy has never shown the ability in the tiny stints he's been able to stay healthy. He's nothing in this league other than an insurance nightmare. Just like Bradford and Foles.
Johnny DangerFace Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 (edited) I think locker has looked really good at times when healthy. But he is the most injury prone nfl player in recent memory (more so than Goodwin) and I want nothing to do with him Edit: locker is on a different planet when it comes to being injury prone compared to Bradford of foles Edited December 17, 2014 by Johnny DangerFace
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Just like Bradford and Foles. I don't really know your football knowledge, but I've got to assume you don't know much about these QBs. Locker has played 11 games once and never played more than 7 games in any other season. He has as many INTs as TDs. Sam Bradford has two 16 game seasons over 3000 yards and far more TDs than interceptions. Nick Foles had a season in which he through for 3000 plus yards with 27 TDs and 2 INTs. Sure, it was partially the system. But it takes talent to perfectly execute a system.
dEnnis the Menace Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Cutler is a cancer. He gives up, he ain't tough, and he can't hack it in tough games that matter. He is no better than Orton. Also, Tank, I do believe I told you so regarding this defense being better. like you said tho, you win some you lose some. The last two games will determine how much better they are. (third hall of fame qb in 4 weeks...)
LabattBlue Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 Cutler is a cancer. He gives up, he ain't tough, and he can't hack it in tough games that matter. He is no better than Orton. Also, Tank, I do believe I told you so regarding this defense being better. like you said tho, you win some you lose some. The last two games will determine how much better they are. (third hall of fame qb in 4 weeks...) When we has his head in the game, Cutler is a GREAT "passer"(Orton is not even comparable in this regard). He can throw the ball with zip and accuracy. That being said, he is a head case, and if that wasn't the case, his name wouldn't be thrown out there as possibly available in the offseason.
dEnnis the Menace Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 When we has his head in the game, Cutler is a GREAT "passer"(Orton is not even comparable in this regard). He can throw the ball with zip and accuracy. That being said, he is a head case, and if that wasn't the case, his name wouldn't be thrown out there as possibly available in the offseason. very very true. It just seems lately that he's been more head case than good passer...
TrueBlueGED Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 very very true. It just seems lately that he's been more head case than good passer... In fairness to him, Chicago is a total disaster right now. They have a CFL coach everybody knows is getting fired, they have assistant coaches leaking negative things to the press, vets like Lance Briggs know they're finished there, and so on.
Hoss Posted December 17, 2014 Report Posted December 17, 2014 In fairness to him, Chicago is a total disaster right now. They have a CFL coach everybody knows is getting fired, they have assistant coaches leaking negative things to the press, vets like Lance Briggs know they're finished there, and so on. Yeap. Strange that we offer some stability to a guy like that.
Recommended Posts