[OT] Bills discussion

[LabattBlue]

What was the stat I heard when the Bills were 4-0? Something like 88% of the teams that start the season 4-0 make the playoffs?

 

If the Bills don't get their act together quick, they will become part of the 12% club.

 

-I can't believe how much money they have invested in the lines and yet they are both below average at this point.

 

-It's one thing to play well and lose, but they have outright sucked in all 3 losses.

 

Somebody make the pain go away...please!

[Two or less]

What was the stat I heard when the Bills were 4-0? Something like 88% of the teams that start the season 4-0 make the playoffs?

 

If the Bills don't get their act together quick, they will become part of the 12% club.

 

-I can't believe how much money they have invested in the lines and yet they are both below average at this point.

 

-It's one thing to play well and lose, but they have outright sucked in all 3 losses.

Somebody make the pain go away...please!

 

Kevin Weekes in goal tomorrow night could make it 2 in a row for the Sabres, and then we play Atlanta. lol

 

Although, tomorrow is a versus game. haha

[darksabre]

This is a recurring theme across all sports. Fans who don't understand the rules have nothing left but to insist the ref blew the call. I give you No Goal. And Music City Miracle.

 

Man, you ARE grumpy. :rolleyes:

 

I'm not blaming the refs for anything, I just don't get it. Logically the call makes no sense to me. If a player picks up the ball while out of bounds, wouldn't it be like...running out of bounds? I just don't see how it is a penalty on Lindell if the ball lands in bounds and the player decides to pick it up while out of bounds. As I understand it, if a player makes contact with the ball while out of bounds, that's a penalty on the player who touched the ball.

 

Seriously, if you can explain it feel free. Because it makes zero sense.

[PASabreFan]

Man, you ARE grumpy. :rolleyes:

 

I'm not blaming the refs for anything, I just don't get it. Logically the call makes no sense to me. If a player picks up the ball while out of bounds, wouldn't it be like...running out of bounds? I just don't see how it is a penalty on Lindell if the ball lands in bounds and the player decides to pick it up while out of bounds. As I understand it, if a player makes contact with the ball while out of bounds, that's a penalty on the player who touched the ball.

 

Seriously, if you can explain it feel free. Because it makes zero sense.

 

I can't explain the logic behind the rule. I'm not that into football. But it was the right call -- the player was being congratulated for being smart enough to know the rule and take full advantage.

[PASabreFan]

Wycheck was on the 24. At the throwing point, the ball was on the 25. And Dyson made the catch on the 26. Hmm... Sounds like a forward lateral to me. Unless Wycheck's right arm is 6 feet long.

 

The replay is conclusive, if you don't have blue and red blinders on. The ball is released over the 26 yard line and caught just outside the 25.

[BetweenThePipes00]

Sorry if I am going over old ground here, I have not read the whole thread ... but

 

I am convinced more than ever that you need 3 things to win in the NFL, and the rest is window dressing.

1. A quarterback you can trust. 2. The ability to run the ball. 3. A pass rush.

Despite the turnovers the last 2 weeks, I still think the Bills have #1. The other two have not been there all season save for the pass rush in the opener. Edwards bailed them out with some great 4th quarters, but if they can't find a way to move it on the ground some and get more heat, 5-1 is going to turn into a disappointing 9-7 really fast. Actually, that will be like dying a slow death.

[el_Polako]

This is a recurring theme across all sports. Fans who don't understand the rules have nothing left but to insist the ref blew the call. I give you No Goal. And Music City Miracle.

 

 

Yea but the rule is whack, as are many NFL rules. It's like bozo the clown was in on it when they wrote the rules.

 

Edwards and the Bills will be just fine. With all the players that were out, playing hurt or ill, they sure as heck gave it a great fight.

I just wish the D-line would put a little more pressure on the other teams QB's...

[wjag]

I've been watching football for 33+ years. I saw two things today I have never seen before.

 

1. A player out of bounds can touch a kickoff in bounds and the penalty goes to the kicking team.

 

2. A team can roll off 27 straight plays, consume 15 minutes of game clock and not score a point.

 

Don't you just love this game???

[Chief Enabler]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

I was a non-believer; but @ 1:28 watch where the feet are, from the passer and the receiver. Almost the same as today where Leon had a foot in and out. :wallbash:

 

p.s. painful flashbacks of Rob Johnson.......very painful.....

[Chief Enabler]

I agree w/ you to a large extent, but that goal was a "no goal." I won't argue the Music City call. Did it suck; meaning the Bills were about to knocked out. Yes, it did. If Buffalo was the home team the call would've probably gone the other way.

 

Too bad the Bills are all of a sudden 5-3 and 0-2 in the division. Playoffs are looking questionable...

It's an interesting intermission, Speed up to about 4:40 when Cherry brings up the Sabres and the last minute when he calls out no goal.

 

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[PASabreFan]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

 

I was a non-believer; but @ 1:28 watch where the feet are, from the passer and the receiver. Almost the same as today where Leon had a foot in and out. :wallbash:

 

p.s. painful flashbacks of Rob Johnson.......very painful.....

 

It doesn't go by where the feet are. And you have to watch straight down the line of play. From that angle, it's basically an optical illusion that the ball went forward.

[Chief Enabler]

It doesn't go by where the feet are. And you have to watch straight down the line of play. From that angle, it's basically an optical illusion that the ball went forward.

I think we all know, its the only angle. I cant call you on the feet placement, which is where my beliefs were as well (on the ball).

[BetweenThePipes00]

Holy crap guys, the day sucked enough with the loss, do we need to re-live more nightmares? What, you couldn't find the footage of Wide Right or a montage of Super Bowl turnovers against the Cowboys? How about the play clock expiring in the 1981 playoffs? Or Campbell putting the puck over the glass in 2006?

[Chief Enabler]

Holy crap guys, the day sucked enough with the loss, do we need to re-live more nightmares? What, you couldn't find the footage of Wide Right or a montage of Super Bowl turnovers against the Cowboys? How about the play clock expiring in the 1981 playoffs? Or Campbell putting the puck over the glass in 2006?

You tell us. you're the one in Nashville. Can we agree to root for Peyton tonight? These moments are who we are.

[BetweenThePipes00]

You tell us. you're the one in Nashville. Can we agree to root for Peyton tonight? These moments are who we are.

Come on, I was kidding, am I not just as much at fault bringing those other things up?

Obviously, we have to root for the Colts tonight. Although the Bills at least play the Pats twice still ... if they play like they have shown they can, they have a chance even of the Pats win tonight. If they keep playing like the last 5 quarters, doesn't matter who wins tonight.

[Chief Enabler]

Come on, I was kidding, am I not just as much at fault bringing those other things up?

Obviously, we have to root for the Colts tonight. Although the Bills at least play the Pats twice still ... if they play like they have shown they can, they have a chance even of the Pats win tonight. If they keep playing like the last 5 quarters, doesn't matter who wins tonight.

It was funny last week at a local joint. A bunch of Tennesee fans were rooting against KC when they smoked'em and all you could say was "it's KC".

 

The Colts are going to win tonight. Belicheck going for 2 pts. dumb. After watching the Bills today, especially in a close game, take the points Bill.

[Guest Sloth]

If the Pats win, Buffalo will be 3rd in the AFC East, due to their division record.

[Chief Enabler]

I cannot stand the fact of listening to WEEI this week if they win. :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash:

[Knightrider]

I cannot stand the fact of listening to WEEI this week if they win. :wallbash: :wallbash: :wallbash:

 

No worries. It's always fun to listen when they lose...

 

Here's hoping I'll be listening to them next week!

[Chief Enabler]

No worries. It's always fun to listen when they lose...

 

Here's hoping I'll be listening to them next week!

They still give themselves credit for holding the Colts to 18 in their own house, and how Cassel has been so much better than Brad Johnson as a backup :wallbash: Listening to them about Manny, Sabathia & Texeira going to the Yanks is always a good topic :thumbsup:

 

I believe its a double header weekend with the Sabres @ the Fleet Center, Bills @ the foodcourt.

[Knightrider]

They still give themselves credit for holding the Colts to 18 in their own house, and how Cassel has been so much better than Brad Johnson as a backup :wallbash: Listening to them about Manny, Sabathia & Texeira going to the Yanks is always a good topic :thumbsup:

 

I believe its a double header weekend with the Sabres @ the Fleet Center, Bills @ the foodcourt.

 

It is. I have tickets in section 13 for the family for the Sabres, but can't do Gillette, too.

[shrader]

Yeah, saturday should be fun. The Bills backers have a big group of seats up in the balcony. Sunday? What else is on tv?

[Taro T]

Trent stopped throwing after the pick-6 and started aiming the ball. You could also tell he missed Josh Reed a lot today. Bottom line, with five turnovers over the last two losses - three TO's today and two last week -- and three fumbles in the last two weeks - Trent has got to take better care of the ball.

 

The offensive line, and Whittle in particular, was awful today. Shades of 2007 -- the defense couldn't get off the field late in the game.

I don't understand that rule either, especially because Washington had one foot in and one out, and went out on his own volition. A gunner can't be the first to touch the ball on a punt if he goes out of bounds, why is a returner allowed to go out of bounds under his own power and touch a ball that is in-play and have the kicking team get penalized? Just seems weird.

While I think it is an incredibly ridiculous rule, it is the rule. They don't let the gunner go out of bounds and touch the ball 1st pretty much to keep guys from doing the old Tasker down the sideline routine.

 

The runner is allowed to go out of bounds and touch it and give the other team a penalty for the same reason back in '01 that the Patsie lying unconscious w/ one foot on the sideline after fumbling a catch and having the ball brush against him as the Bills recovered it was awarded the ball. A player in contact w/ the sideline/out of bounds is himself out of bounds. So when that player touches the ball, the ball is out of bounds. It would seem that the rule is not is keeping w/ the spirit of the game and would be easy enough to modify (if an out of bounds player on the receiving team touches the ball, the receiving team takes possession at the spot where he touched it). But that's probably the 5th or 6th time I've seen it called that way and the league doesn't seem to see it as an issue.

[Two or less]

Yeah, saturday should be fun. The Bills backers have a big group of seats up in the balcony. Sunday? What else is on tv?

 

Where you guys sitting? I'm in a corner in the 300s where Sabres shoot twice. I wanna say 327?

[Bmwolf21]

While I think it is an incredibly ridiculous rule, it is the rule. They don't let the gunner go out of bounds and touch the ball 1st pretty much to keep guys from doing the old Tasker down the sideline routine.

 

The runner is allowed to go out of bounds and touch it and give the other team a penalty for the same reason back in '01 that the Patsie lying unconscious w/ one foot on the sideline after fumbling a catch and having the ball brush against him as the Bills recovered it was awarded the ball. A player in contact w/ the sideline/out of bounds is himself out of bounds. So when that player touches the ball, the ball is out of bounds. It would seem that the rule is not is keeping w/ the spirit of the game and would be easy enough to modify (if an out of bounds player on the receiving team touches the ball, the receiving team takes possession at the spot where he touched it). But that's probably the 5th or 6th time I've seen it called that way and the league doesn't seem to see it as an issue.

Thanks, Taro. That's a much better explanation than "that's the rule," which is the extent of the explanations I've seen here and elsewhere. The bold part is my biggest issue with the whole thing - it just doesn't seem right that he can step out of bounds on purpose and touch a ball that appeared to be staying in play, and in the process the kicking team is penalized.

 

The '01 Patsie game you mentioned - was that the old "Just give it to 'em" game?