off topic Buffalo Bills 2015

[That Aud Smell]

I'm not sure what to think or believe anymore. Those cats on GR -- even the guys who are generally pretty good (to me) -- are talking about how the D/ST has actually been quite good, and that there's not much to do about elite units like the Patriots and, this year, the Bengals.

 

The eyeball test tells me: The unit is falling far short of expectations and potential. They're not really disrupting or scaring anyone, as far as I can tell.

[Doohicksie]

Yep.  Rex said he was going to build a bully and instead he built a pipsqueak.

[TrueBlueGED]

No. It has not been "very good." Allowing 3 teams to do whatever they want, and having those stats be somewhat counterbalanced by good games against 2 lousy teams, is not "very good" defense.

How many points is it acceptable to allow other teams to score when our offense keeps giving them the ball back inside our own 50? The teams we've played are a combined 14-3...even the most optimistic fans didn't think we had an elite team on our hands. Wild card hopefuls will usually look worse when playing the great teams, that's just how it works. I really wish you and others would stop ignoring this sort of context. Bad defenses don't limit Odell Beckham and AJ Green to under 100 yards combined. Even Tyler Eifert only got free for that short TD when he beat our 4th string safety.

[Eleven]

I dunno. These guys love cars. They're super competitive. How about just a race to where they were all going to eat?

 

I remember friendly faces out of the high school parking lot, where the drivers did some fairly dumb sh1t.

 

Why else would be have lost control of a 2016 Corvette within moments of leaving the team's training facility?

 

Because he's unfamiliar with the car and the area and possibly the Seattle weather.

 

He's too much a family man to be drag racing.  He's also too old for that nonsense.

Edited October 21, 2015 by eleven

[That Aud Smell]

Because he's unfamiliar with the car and the area and possibly the Seattle weather.

 

He's too much a family man to be drag racing. He's also too old for that nonsense.

Hmm. Maybe. Also sounds like maybe he was funking around and screwed up.

 

Also, I think there's a difference between drag racing and, um, street racing.

[nfreeman]

How many points is it acceptable to allow other teams to score when our offense keeps giving them the ball back inside our own 50? The teams we've played are a combined 14-3...even the most optimistic fans didn't think we had an elite team on our hands. Wild card hopefuls will usually look worse when playing the great teams, that's just how it works. I really wish you and others would stop ignoring this sort of context. Bad defenses don't limit Odell Beckham and AJ Green to under 100 yards combined. Even Tyler Eifert only got free for that short TD when he beat our 4th string safety.

 

Who is ignoring context?  This isn't a question of relativity or "looking better" vs "looking worse."  A "very good" defense doesn't get utterly steamrolled the way the Bills were against the Pats, Giants and Bengals. 

 

Also, speaking of small sample size (which we weren't, but you often do), it doesn't matter a-tall that a couple of cherry-picked receivers didn't have huge games against the Bills -- since their teammates on offense collectively had huge days.

[Eleven]

Hmm. Maybe. Also sounds like maybe he was funking around and screwed up.

 

Also, I think there's a difference between drag racing and, um, street racing.

 

Could be that they were pacing each other a bit.  We all know guys do that.

[TrueBlueGED]

Who is ignoring context? This isn't a question of relativity or "looking better" vs "looking worse." A "very good" defense doesn't get utterly steamrolled the way the Bills were against the Pats, Giants and Bengals.

 

Also, speaking of small sample size (which we weren't, but you often do), it doesn't matter a-tall that a couple of cherry-picked receivers didn't have huge games against the Bills -- since their teammates on offense collectively had huge days.

Way to ignore context immediately after saying nobody is ignoring it. So very good defenses don't have bad days. Ever. Under any circumstances. Got it.

 

Personally, I think the very definitional difference between a dominant defense and a very good defense is that a very good defense will tend to have a worse game against great teams. If the defense was as bad as you and some others suggest, they wouldn't be shutting down lesser teams, they'd be giving up points there too.

[That Aud Smell]

Could be that they were pacing each other a bit.  We all know guys do that.

 

Also could be that the local law enforcement were going out of their way to be helpful to beloved Seahawks in a situation where no one was hurt, no real damage done (other than to the car). It certainly strikes me as strange that the Renton police would affirmatively debunk the TMZ report in their own press release. Why do that? Weird.

 

Also, fwiw:

 

Update (1:37 a.m.): TMZ has put this update on the top of their story:

Law enforcement tells TMZ at this point in their investigation, there is nothing to indicate a drag race. However, our witnesses insist both cars were driving at a VERY high rate of speed.  

[Claude_Verret]

TrueBlue is probably right about the Bills D, but honestly I don't watch the games closely enough to feel comfortable engaging in deep analysis of the Bills and what is or isn't wrong with them.  I'm at the point where I've seen the same results for a decade and a half and I feel most comfortable just chalking it up to the Bills still being the Bills. The lack of a real QB, the untimely stupid penalties, the controversial calls/non calls, questionable coaching, Brady still going strong and on and on... these collectively to me equal Bills football, what is "wrong" with them and the perpetuity of 6-9 win seasons.

[Thwomp!]

And Percy is apparently not in London due to "personal reasons" http://www.syracuse.com/buffalo-bills/index.ssf/2015/10/percy_harvin_didnt_travel_with_buffalo_bills_to_england_for_personal_reasons.html?hootPostID=6cbdff46c84ef69fd2b986f23c18dc80

 

I'm thinking he's the player that had the passport problem and I'm also hoping that he's not becoming the problem player he has been in the past.

[dEnnis the Menace]

Who is ignoring context?  This isn't a question of relativity or "looking better" vs "looking worse."  A "very good" defense doesn't get utterly steamrolled the way the Bills were against the Pats, Giants and Bengals. 

 

Also, speaking of small sample size (which we weren't, but you often do), it doesn't matter a-tall that a couple of cherry-picked receivers didn't have huge games against the Bills -- since their teammates on offense collectively had huge days.

 

Who had huge days?  Against the Pats, every eligible receiver had a huge game, but in every other game, the QBs rake up yards in garbage time, or by throwing to 9 different receivers who all have 30 yards.  That's not really having a huge day, that;s only taking the only thing available - the dink and dunks that the D is giving.  Look at the Giants.  The Dolphins yardage was raked up in garbage time like the Colts.  The Titans were held to ta total of 200 receiving yards. The Bengals and Pats are really the only two teams to go off.  

[MattPie]

Way to ignore context immediately after saying nobody is ignoring it. So very good defenses don't have bad days. Ever. Under any circumstances. Got it.

 

Personally, I think the very definitional difference between a dominant defense and a very good defense is that a very good defense will tend to have a worse game against great teams. If the defense was as bad as you and some others suggest, they wouldn't be shutting down lesser teams, they'd be giving up points there too.

 

I'm not entirely disagreeing with you, but very good defenses don't have bad days 50% of the time. The point someone made above about the offense giving the defense bad field position and little time off is very valid, however. Perhaps the defense will look a lot better if the offense becomes competent.

[nfreeman]

Way to ignore context immediately after saying nobody is ignoring it. So very good defenses don't have bad days. Ever. Under any circumstances. Got it.

 

Personally, I think the very definitional difference between a dominant defense and a very good defense is that a very good defense will tend to have a worse game against great teams. If the defense was as bad as you and some others suggest, they wouldn't be shutting down lesser teams, they'd be giving up points there too.

 

Holy straw man, batman!

 

Again:  "very good" defenses don't get completely manhandled by 3 of the 4 good offenses they face (at home no less). 

 

This view does not, IMHO, ignore the context.  Ignoring the context would be insisting that they should've performed just as well against those 3 teams as they did against the Titans and Dolphins.  No one is taking that view, and no one is pretending that they should've shut everyone out.  But this allegedly very good D was a non-factor in those games.

 

Who had huge days?  Against the Pats, every eligible receiver had a huge game, but in every other game, the QBs rake up yards in garbage time, or by throwing to 9 different receivers who all have 30 yards.  That's not really having a huge day, that;s only taking the only thing available - the dink and dunks that the D is giving.  Look at the Giants.  The Dolphins yardage was raked up in garbage time like the Colts.  The Titans were held to ta total of 200 receiving yards. The Bengals and Pats are really the only two teams to go off.  

 

As previously mentioned:  the Pats, Giants and Bengals did whatever they wanted against the Bills' D.  Yes, the D played well against the bailing-on-their-coach Dolphins and the rookie-QB Titans, but playing well against those teams isn't why you pay that D a zillion dollars.

[That Aud Smell]

sleep specialist says it oughta be bills in a rout.

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sleep-specialist-forecasts-bills-victory-after-looking-at-jags--london-travel-plans-144518876.html

 

is the pegulas' willingness to foot the bill for the week in london going to help the bills get a much needed W?

[dEnnis the Menace]

Holy straw man, batman!

 

Again:  "very good" defenses don't get completely manhandled by 3 of the 4 good offenses they face (at home no less). 

 

This view does not, IMHO, ignore the context.  Ignoring the context would be insisting that they should've performed just as well against those 3 teams as they did against the Titans and Dolphins.  No one is taking that view, and no one is pretending that they should've shut everyone out.  But this allegedly very good D was a non-factor in those games.

 

 

As previously mentioned:  the Pats, Giants and Bengals did whatever they wanted against the Bills' D.  Yes, the D played well against the bailing-on-their-coach Dolphins and the rookie-QB Titans, but playing well against those teams isn't why you pay that D a zillion dollars.

 

I'll say it again, outside of the one long screen pass to Jennings that netted him all of his 50 yards receiving, no one else had a huge day for the Giants.  The undefeated Pats and the undefeated Bengals, whose QBs are having career years exploited us.  The Giants did not do whatever they wanted.  We held ODB to career lows (38 yards and something like 5 catches on 12 targets), and Randle couldn't do anything.  They lined their best receiver up in the slot to try to get things going for them and that still didn't work.  

 

I agree that we need more pressure, and I agree that our D should be better, but when our D is on the field for 20 of 30 minutes per half, I think that's a little harsh, especially when the offense gives the D a short field to work/protect.  Our offense is the problem, not the D.  The D needs a little reform, but the O needs to get their together.  

[qwksndmonster]

I agree that the D has been put in terrible positions by the O as of late, but I can't forgive the deficiencies on that side of the ball. Pettine had an adjustment period were his defenses gave up many rush yards. Schwartz did a pretty great job getting the D at a high level in short order.

 

Rex is supposed to be better than these guys. A "defensive mastermind." I got spoiled by the end of last year and so far all that Sexy Rexy has done is fix what wasn't broken.

 

The special teams hasn't been good. There is no universe where anybody can say that they have been (pi, I will kill you). Holding/block in the back on what seems like 90% of returns. At least no good returns were being called back.

[TrueBlueGED]

I agree that the D has been put in terrible positions by the O as of late, but I can't forgive the deficiencies on that side of the ball. Pettine had an adjustment period were his defenses gave up many rush yards. Schwartz did a pretty great job getting the D at a high level in short order.

 

Rex is supposed to be better than these guys. A "defensive mastermind." I got spoiled by the end of last year and so far all that Sexy Rexy has done is fix what wasn't broken.

 

The special teams hasn't been good. There is no universe where anybody can say that they have been (pi, I will kill you). Holding/block in the back on what seems like 90% of returns. At least no good returns were being called back.

 

As it turns out, the end of last year wasn't all that impressive. Shutting down the Packers was the only impressive performance (which was aided by Jordy Nelson dropping what should have been an 80 yard TD). Who else did we play? Peyton is obviously a shell of what he used to be, so that poor stretch he had to end last year wasn't brought on by our defense. To close out the year we played the Dolphins, Jets (Geno Smith and Mike Vick!!!), Browns  (Brian Hoyer and Johnny "alcohol" Football), Broncos, Packers, Raiders, and a quitting Garoppolo-led Patriots team. Is shutting those teams down somehow impressive? And by shutting down, of course, you have to look at Tannehill and Derek freakin' Carr who had as good of days against us as Eli did this year (200 yards and 2 TDs versus 200 yards 3 TDs and 1 pick). Yet somehow last year's defense was amazing, and this year Manning getting 200 yards counts as doing whatever he wants. 

Edited October 21, 2015 by TrueBlueGED

[nfreeman]

As it turns out, the end of last year wasn't all that impressive. Shutting down the Packers was the only impressive performance (which was aided by Jordy Nelson dropping what should have been an 80 yard TD). Who else did we play? Peyton is obviously a shell of what he used to be, so that poor stretch he had to end last year wasn't brought on by our defense. To close out the year we played the Dolphins, Jets (Geno Smith and Mike Vick!!!), Browns  (Brian Hoyer and Johnny "alcohol" Football), Broncos, Packers, Raiders, and a quitting Garoppolo-led Patriots team. Is shutting those teams down somehow impressive? And by shutting down, of course, you have to look at Tannehill and Derek freakin' Carr who had as good of days against us as Eli did this year (200 yards and 2 TDs versus 200 yards 3 TDs and 1 pick). Yet somehow last year's defense was amazing, and this year Manning getting 200 yards counts as doing whatever he wants. 

 

Did you watch the Giants game?  If so, do you think the Bills' D had a "very good" game?

[Eleven]

I don't know why anyone is arguing that the Bills have a very good defense.  They don't.  The question is why.  And I think the answer is misuse of talent.  Very good defenders /= a very good defense.

[TrueBlueGED]

Did you watch the Giants game?  If so, do you think the Bills' D had a "very good" game?

 

Yes and yes. One of Manning's TDs came on a drive start on our 32 yard line following an interception. A second came when Manning passed behind the line of scrimmage and Nigel Bradham decided to drive at Rashad Jennings' feet like an overzealous Madden player--that's not Rex's fault, the play call had the offense covered, Bradham just botched it. That would have been a critical 3rd down stop, forcing the Giants to punt and giving us a chance to win the game.

[nfreeman]

Yes and yes. One of Manning's TDs came on a drive start on our 32 yard line following an interception. A second came when Manning passed behind the line of scrimmage and Nigel Bradham decided to drive at Rashad Jennings' feet like an overzealous Madden player--that's not Rex's fault, the play call had the offense covered, Bradham just botched it. That would have been a critical 3rd down stop, forcing the Giants to punt and giving us a chance to win the game.

 

OK.  Eye of the beholder, I guess.

[Wyldnwoody44]

We could argue all day about the D, the offense Is what it is, a new QB and players that get injured every time they sneeze.

 

What I want is our super overpriced line to not be dropping into coverage, just line up, hand in the ground and wreak havoc.... That's what these Beasts are supposed to do.

 

Yes new England is good, Brady is amazing, but they have a new, rookie Line and we did nothing to exploit that (yes I know Brady releases the ball in 0.3 seconds) but still, nothing.

 

Dalton wasn't touched once all Game, and with EJ freaking Manuel on the O side of the ball, turnovers were needed badly.

 

Rex has done nothing to excite me at all so far this year, this team will have a nice 80 yard scoring drive and then, bam, nothing til the 4th quarter, the scheme he's using is plain and simple not working, teams are realizing that they can take 7 yards a play easily and just drive it right down on us.

 

Ita rare that we've put teams into 3rd and long and when we do, they've been converting a lot.

 

But we are 3-3,with a crappy AFC. So playoffs are in play. Just don't expect a wildcard win if we squeak in is all.

[qwksndmonster]

Did you watch the Giants game?  If so, do you think the Bills' D had a "very good" game?

I'm with you on this.  Our D got manhandled by the Giants and Rex got manhandled by Old Man (goblin?) Coughlin.

 

I don't know why anyone is arguing that the Bills have a very good defense.  They don't.  The question is why.  And I think the answer is misuse of talent.  Very good defenders /= a very good defense.

Agree.

As it turns out, the end of last year wasn't all that impressive. Shutting down the Packers was the only impressive performance (which was aided by Jordy Nelson dropping what should have been an 80 yard TD). Who else did we play? Peyton is obviously a shell of what he used to be, so that poor stretch he had to end last year wasn't brought on by our defense. To close out the year we played the Dolphins, Jets (Geno Smith and Mike Vick!!!), Browns  (Brian Hoyer and Johnny "alcohol" Football), Broncos, Packers, Raiders, and a quitting Garoppolo-led Patriots team. Is shutting those teams down somehow impressive? And by shutting down, of course, you have to look at Tannehill and Derek freakin' Carr who had as good of days against us as Eli did this year (200 yards and 2 TDs versus 200 yards 3 TDs and 1 pick). Yet somehow last year's defense was amazing, and this year Manning getting 200 yards counts as doing whatever he wants. 

Awwww, Blue's love has lifted the coil.  Shutting down the Packers was huge.  And that defense got pressure consistently, it felt like we were dominating games.

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm with you on this. Our D got manhandled by the Giants and Rex got manhandled by Old Man (goblin?) Coughlin.

 

Agree.

 

Awwww, Blue's love has lifted the coil. Shutting down the Packers was huge. And that defense got pressure consistently, it felt like we were dominating games.

I can't explain how painful it is for me to admit Peyton really is done (and sadly, he's still probably better than half the league if his OL wasn't putrid). It's legitimately emotionally hurtful to watch.