Monday, October 03, 2005

Oh, they played yesterday? Really?

Well, I suppose I have to say something about the Buffalo Bills, who turned in yet another lackluster performance yesterday in losing to the New Orleans Saints (temporarily ensconced in San Antonio), 19-7. So here are some random thoughts on the soon-to-be-redubbed "Buffalo Shitty Bills":

:: If the defense doesn't blitz, they don't get pressure on the opposing quarterback. It's just that simple. And when they're not blitzing, they're terribly susceptible to the run. And Nate Clements just isn't as good as he think he is, so next year I'm fine with using the money the Bills would need to re-sign him and instead use it to bolster the offensive line and get a real pass-rusher in here, either a linebacker or a defensive lineman.

:: Everybody thinks your running back is an offensive superstar in waiting. He starts off the game with a twenty-five yard run. For the game he averages five yards a carry. At no point in the game, except at about a minute left in the fourth quarter, are you behind in the score by more than ten points. So of course you'd only give him the ball sixteen times.

:: J.P. Losman's throws looked better yesterday. He still isn't hitting the receivers on the numbers consistently, but he's putting the ball in places where they, if they're really the great posse of NFL receivers we've been led to believe they are, should make the catches. But no: drops galore, and another 75-yard performance.

:: Benching Losman? Bad idea, especially when the offense is stalling due to stupid penalties on first downs and because of bad playcalling. Here's something: I agree completely with Jerry Sullivan for once.

It's not Losman who calls plays. It's the offensive coordinator, Tom Clements, who loves to outthink himself. Clements had the Bills running against Atlanta instead of exploiting a ravaged secondary. In a noisy Alamodome, he had Willis McGahee carry just 16 times, even though he averaged 5.3 yards a pop. Is it against the rules to let McGahee carry on consecutive plays? Or to use him on third downs?

It's not Losman who missed a field goal late in the first half. Rian Lindell is automatic - until a kick truly matters. With the Bills trailing, 10-7, he could have tied the game and given them a jolt of momentum. He missed a 45-yarder. The Saints got a 40-yarder from John Carney just before halftime. Huge six-point swing.

It's not Losman who allowed the Saints to convert seven of 15 third downs and roll up 167 rushing yards. How many blitzes does Jerry Gray have to call before he realizes his guys aren't getting there? Is it my imagination, or is Gray trying to blitz his way to a head coaching job?

It's not Losman who committed 12 penalties for 79 yards. In fact, it was those heady veterans. Nate Clements, the self-proclaimed best cornerback in the game, had two. Moulds had one. So did Mark Campbell, Trey Teague and London Fletcher.

It's not Losman who couldn't contain the Saints' four-man pass rush. The offensive line was wretched in pass protection, another reason why Clements should have run more. Mularkey was not pleased. He said it was too bad he didn't have five new O-linemen to use for a spark.


The Bills need to stand up and say, "Look, fans: we've got to give this kid as many reps in games as humanly possible, which might mean that we're missing the playoffs this year. But he'll get better because of it." Troy Aikman's first year as starter? 1-15. Peyton Manning's first year as starter? 3-13. Jim Kelly's first year as starter? 4-12. There's a reason why Kurt Warner and Ben Rothlissburgor (I think I spelled that wrong) were so electrifying in their debuts: it's because they were amazing exceptions to an iron-clad rule. And if the Bills start Kelly Holcomb, it just postpones Losman's development by one more year. If Losman's a bust, or if he's the next great Bills QB, it doesn't change anything: we need to find out which one he is, and soon. Benching him yesterday was just stupid, and it's going to mess with his head.

:: You're down by nine points with four minutes to go in the game, which means that you need two scores to take the lead. It's forth down. And you punt. Well, you might as well forfeit the game, then. (Readers of Gregg Easterbrook's TMQ column, make a note of this. You will see the Bills' Preposterous Punt from yesterday mentioned in tomorrow's column.)

:: I bitch about the offensive line every week, but I don't get how they can be reasonably average on run-blocking and suck so massively at pass-blocking. Or is it just that McGahee is good enough to excel even with shitty blocking? Kinda makes me wonder what he'd be like if we had a line of the Dallas or Washington caliber (circa 1980s for Washington, 1990s for Dallas).

Summing up where I am right now as a Bills fan: because of Losman's youth and inexperience, I'm willing to write this year off. But if the Bills fail to make the playoffs in 2006, it'll be time for Tom Donahoe to be shown the door.

Other football notes:

:: As much as I think Terrell Owens is a gigantic jerk, man, does he back it up on the field or what. It's like he says to himself, every time he does something outrageous, "Holy shit, I gotta make up for this one in the game." And then he does. The guy's amazing, and I don't think he gets the respect he should for being at the absolute top of the NFL.

:: Hmmmm...the New England Stupid Patriots have already lost two games, and their defense looks distinctly ordinary against the run. And their next game has them visiting Atlanta, the NFL's best team at running the ball. The StuPats could well be under .500 for the first time in quite a while after this coming Sunday. And it can't be encouraging to Bill Belichick, the fans in Boston, or all those sad people nationwide who have been serving StuPat Kool-Aid at every meal for the last four years that the StuPats have given up more points than anyone else in the AFC after four games (and all but three teams in the NFC). Call me crazy, but two-time defending champs or no, a team that's on pace to give up over 400 points this season has cause to be worried a bit.

Of course, if it means that the StuPats are experiencing a stumble-in-progress, then I for one welcome our new alien overlords!

:: Now that most of the league has played four games, it's a little bit meaningful to take a gander at the current standings, versus my predictions before the season. So here's how things shape up right now, with my predictions in parentheses after the current leaders:

AFC East: Miami Dolphins (New England Stupid Patriots)
AFC North: Cincinnati Bengals (Cincinnati Bengals)
AFC South: Indianapolis Colts (Indianapolis Colts)
AFC West: Denver Broncos (San Diego Chargers)
AFC Wildcards: New York Jets, Pittsburgh Steelers

NFC East: Washington Redskins (Philadelphia Eagles)
NFC North: Chicago Bears (Minnesota Vikings)
NFC South: Tampa Bay Buccaneers (Atlanta Falcons)
NFC West: Seattle Seahawks (Arizona Cardinals)
NFC Wildcards: Seattle Seahawks, Carolina Panthers

Well, I only have two teams that I picked to win divisions actually leading their divisions, but I think I'm safe on a few others -- does anybody think that the Dolphins are for real, much less that they can hold off the StuPats in a surprisingly weak AFC East? or the Redskins? I also find the Vikings' dismal start very surprising, but the NFC North appears to be a diaster of a division. (And the less said about the fact that I picked the Cardinals to win a division title, the better, thank you very much.) I'm not bothering to figure out who'd be the wildcard teams if the season ended right now, either, but as of now nobody I picked to be in the playoffs, with the exception of the Panthers, is more than a game or two out of first place.

That's it for this week. Next week, J.P. Losman gets his first look at the Dolphins, a team that Jim Kelly made his bitch for much of his time here. That would be a worthy opponent for him to start turning it around against. (My God, that may have been the worst sentence I've ever written. Ending with a preposition? Ha! I ended with two!)

Appy polly loggies to Sean for the cheap humor. But I'm sure he'll get me back in due course.

No comments: