New England Defense

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    I'm all for getting stops at the end against a rookie you let embarrass you earlier in the game. Our D isn't known for coming up big late in games for some time now, so that is a positive.

     



    Yeah those 14 points and 150 passing yards sure was embarrassing.  Are you high?

     




    I'm not high, but if you aren't maybe you should twist up a party h00ter and try something different, because you are missing the boat with this spin.

    The Bills had the ball for 22 minutes. They had 10 penalties for 75 yards. Were you expecting he would throw for 400 yards in that mess? LMAO

    The FACT is, a rookie NOBODY was extremely effective against this D, and any honest person has to admit that is a concern just as it has been for some years now.

    I'm not going to tolerate this Rusty nonsense that the D was good because the Bills O only scored 14 points. THEY screwed up over and over. We ate up the clock. It wasn't our great defensive play that kept the score lower. Hell, one of the fumbles wasn't even from contact.

     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to PhatVirgin's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    I don't talk about might have beens, the guy is in on just about every play, he doesn't shy away from contact, our defense played decent and he led the way.  Nobody got a sack, only one tackle for a loss... we have to play better but he isn't the problem.

    so, what is the problem with the defense?



    Youth

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from cyncalpatfan. Show cyncalpatfan's posts

    Re: New England Defense


    I think another important fact to keep in mind is that Buffalo was playing with the pedal to the medal every time they had the ball.  I'd say that the defense did a good job, especially when you consider that they had little to no time to catch their breath between plays and substitutions were likely kept to a minimum.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to Philskiw1's comment:

    I'm not.  The bills shot their own feet with penalties.  As much as I hate to say this, the bills should have won. 

     

     

    Now you got the easy part done telling me about it.

    Does that handshaped bruise on your back hurt?



    Sudfeld tip pass to a DB, Brady fumbling on the one, Ridley fumbling all over the place - one on a scoring type drive...  sooo Pats didn't shoot themselves in the foot?  Glass half full or empty???  This was a big road game win if you ask me.  Wasn't pretty but they came back to win on the road.  

     

     

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    I'm all for getting stops at the end against a rookie you let embarrass you earlier in the game. Our D isn't known for coming up big late in games for some time now, so that is a positive.

     



    Yeah those 14 points and 150 passing yards sure was embarrassing.  Are you high?

     



    Why do you waste your time. Babe is the exact polar opposite of Rusty. Neither one can be objective because they paint themselves into a corner with their rhetoric over Brady.

    One has a love affair with him and the other will find a way to blame a rainy day on him. They are opposite sides of the same coin.

     

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:



    I'm not high, but if you aren't maybe you should twist up a party h00ter and try something different, because you are missing the boat with this spin.

    The Bills had the ball for 22 minutes. They had 10 penalties for 75 yards. Were you expecting he would throw for 400 yards in that mess? LMAO

    The FACT is, a rookie NOBODY was extremely effective against this D, and any honest person has to admit that is a concern just as it has been for some years now.

    I'm not going to tolerate this Rusty nonsense that the D was good because the Bills O only scored 14 points. THEY screwed up over and over. We ate up the clock. It wasn't our great defensive play that kept the score lower. Hell, one of the fumbles wasn't even from contact.

     




    There are so many things wrong with this post.  First of all it is ridiculous to give the offense all of the credit for ToP.  Aren't you the guy that solely blames the defense in SB46 for the lopsided ToP?  So if we win ToP all credit goes to the offense and if we lose it all blame goes to the D.  Unreal.  Maybe the reason the Bills only had the ball for 22 minutes is they couldn't move it?

    The Bills had 13 possessions yesterday which means the offense wasn't just slowing the game down the whole time and limiting possessions. 

    Yesterday the Defense held the bills to 1.08 points per possession, 22 yards per possession and a 30.8% 3rd down conversion rate.  All 3 of those figures WOULD HAVE LED THE NFL LAST SEASON.  Plus they forced 2 turnovers which gave the offense two short fields which resulted in TDs.  To say any part of the Bills' offense was "extremely effective" is laughable. 

    I'm not ready to anoint this squad the 2000 Ravens after one game and it is true that we'll get a better sense as the season goes on for how this D is going to come together, but the fact that you are trying to spin this game as a negative for the defense is crazy imo.  At the very least is should be neutral because of the opponent.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

     

     

    I'm all for getting stops at the end against a rookie you let embarrass you earlier in the game. Our D isn't known for coming up big late in games for some time now, so that is a positive.

     

     



    Yeah those 14 points and 150 passing yards sure was embarrassing.  Are you high?

     

     

     



    Why do you waste your time. Babe is the exact polar opposite of Rusty. Neither one can be objective because they paint themselves into a corner with their rhetoric over Brady.

     

    One has a love affair with him and the other will find a way to blame a rainy day on him. They are opposite sides of the same coin.

     




    You might make some sense with this reply, if Brady was the subject. LMAO@U

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

      Plus they forced 2 turnovers



    Oh, you mean like when Spiller lost control of the ball untouched while changing from one hand to the other? LMAO@U

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    Oh, you mean like when Spiller lost control of the ball untouched while changing from one hand to the other? LMAO@U



    Way to ignore the rest of my post.  You are wrong btw.  Watch the replay.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    Hey Babe remember that time you said Arrington didn't force the fumble on Spiller?  LMAO @ U.

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:



    I'm not high, but if you aren't maybe you should twist up a party h00ter and try something different, because you are missing the boat with this spin.

     

    The Bills had the ball for 22 minutes. They had 10 penalties for 75 yards. Were you expecting he would throw for 400 yards in that mess? LMAO

    The FACT is, a rookie NOBODY was extremely effective against this D, and any honest person has to admit that is a concern just as it has been for some years now.

    I'm not going to tolerate this Rusty nonsense that the D was good because the Bills O only scored 14 points. THEY screwed up over and over. We ate up the clock. It wasn't our great defensive play that kept the score lower. Hell, one of the fumbles wasn't even from contact.

     




    There are so many things wrong with this post.  First of all it is ridiculous to give the offense all of the credit for ToP.  Aren't you the guy that solely blames the defense in SB46 for the lopsided ToP?  So if we win ToP all credit goes to the offense and if we lose it all blame goes to the D.  Unreal.  Maybe the reason the Bills only had the ball for 22 minutes is they couldn't move it?

     

    The Bills had 13 possessions yesterday which means the offense wasn't just slowing the game down the whole time and limiting possessions. 

    Yesterday the Defense held the bills to 1.08 points per possession, 22 yards per possession and a 30.8% 3rd down conversion rate.  All 3 of those figures WOULD HAVE LED THE NFL LAST SEASON.  Plus they forced 2 turnovers which gave the offense two short fields which resulted in TDs.  To say any part of the Bills' offense was "extremely effective" is laughable. 

    I'm not ready to anoint this squad the 2000 Ravens after one game and it is true that we'll get a better sense as the season goes on for how this D is going to come together, but the fact that you are trying to spin this game as a negative for the defense is crazy imo.  At the very least is should be neutral because of the opponent.




    Nonsense.

    The Bills drives:

    1st: Spiller loses control of the ball untouched. *

    2nd: Bills O commits a penalty to kill drive (then adds another on the punt). *

    3rd: Bills get a 1st down then a holding penalty to kill drive. *

    4th: Bills drive to our 43 and get stuffed on a 3rd and one.

    5th: 3 and out.

    6th: Bills fumble.

    7th: 3 and out.

    8th: Bills TD pass. *

    9th: Bills TD pass. *

    10th: Bills drive to their 42 and get a 10 yard penalty on a 3rd and 1. *

    11th: 3 and out.

    12th: Bills drive to their 42 and miss a pass on 3rd and 1.

    13th: 3 and out.

     

    So, it's exactly as I stated. Over half of the drives by the Bills were nothing to crow about for our defense. And they did finally show something against the rookie playing his first game in the latter parts.

    But you claim the TOP was due to good D apparently. LMAO@U

     

    I'm not drawing CONCLUSIONS on the defense. I draw few conclusions until after 5-6 games. I'm simply pointing out that letting a guy put up a 105 in his first NFL game is not a good sign that the pass defense issues of the last several years are improved.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    Hey Babe remember that time you said Arrington didn't force the fumble on Spiller?  LMAO @ U.

     




    The replay showed the ball coming lose before contact was made. LMAO@U

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Oh, you mean like when Spiller lost control of the ball untouched while changing from one hand to the other? LMAO@U

     



    Way to ignore the rest of my post.  You are wrong btw.  Watch the replay.

     




    Hold your water, I replied to your post.

    I watched the replay during the game and the announcer concurred the ball was coming loose when he tried to switch hands before contact.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    So, it's exactly as I stated. I've taken 4 drives that resulted in no points, a turnover and 74 yards and am trying to spin them as negatives for the defense so that I can push my agenda that the rookie QB led offense was effective despite all of the efficiency stats to the contrary.



    Fixed that for you.  LMAO @ your spin.

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from coolade2. Show coolade2's posts

    Re: New England Defense


    286 yards allowed...  That's 8th in the league.  There's your top 10 defense...!

     

    For now...  Lol.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:


    The replay showed the ball coming lose before contact was made. LMAO@U



    So first it was a no contact fumble and now you are saying the ball was coming loose before Arrington PUT HIS FREAKING HANDS ON IT.  Backpedal much?  Literally every media outlet and the NFL counted that as a FF for Arrington.  LMAO @ your spin.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    It is only week 1, but my thoughts on the defense are not far off what i thought before. Our starters if healthy look like a pretty good group and one you wouldnt want to go against. The thing is we are only an injury or 2 away from being a defense that you would love to go against.  I was impressed with the front 7 and the diff. guys I saw on the field. I understand it was a rookie QB, but it was also a rookie running QB with little to no film on file. So BB had to be cautious. Clog the running lanes and hope he would be off target. I didnt see EJ make any amazing throws. Just a couple routines plays. He was free of pressure for the most part because BB didnt come after him. I expect more on Thursday with Geno Smith. Just let him make mistakes on his own and dont allow him to run. Get used to it. We will win again tho' and all thats matters. I like the D so far barring injury

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    So, it's exactly as I stated. I've taken 4 drives that resulted in no points, a turnover and 74 yards and am trying to spin them as negatives for the defense so that I can push my agenda that the rookie QB led offense was effective despite all of the efficiency stats to the contrary.

     



    Fixed that for you.  LMAO @ your spin.

     

     




    ^ Desperate men do desperate things. LMAO@U

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

     

    It's a new season and babe is back to his tired old whine that ALL points scored are the fault of the defense. Fumble run back for afault TD...defenses fault. Points scored by the Bills offense from a short field due to a turnover...defense's fault.

     

     

    I'm all for getting stops at the end against a rookie you let embarrass you earlier in the game. Our D isn't known for coming up big late in games for some time now, so that is a positive.

     

     



    Yeah those 14 points and 150 passing yards sure was embarrassing.  Are you high?

     

     

     




    I'm not high, but if you aren't maybe you should twist up a party h00ter and try something different, because you are missing the boat with this spin.

     

    The Bills had the ball for 22 minutes. They had 10 penalties for 75 yards. Were you expecting he would throw for 400 yards in that mess? LMAO

    The FACT is, a rookie NOBODY was extremely effective against this D, and any honest person has to admit that is a concern just as it has been for some years now.

    I'm not going to tolerate this Rusty nonsense that the D was good because the Bills O only scored 14 points. THEY screwed up over and over. We ate up the clock. It wasn't our great defensive play that kept the score lower. Hell, one of the fumbles wasn't even from contact.

     




     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

     

    You describe yourself perfectly

     

    So, it's exactly as I stated. I've taken 4 drives that resulted in no points, a turnover and 74 yards and am trying to spin them as negatives for the defense so that I can push my agenda that the rookie QB led offense was effective despite all of the efficiency stats to the contrary.

     

     



    Fixed that for you.  LMAO @ your spin.

     

     

     

     




    ^ Desperate men do desperate things. LMAO@U

     




     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    Bottom line after all is said and done is that the pass rush was less than needed (and less than at least I expected). That does nto mean it will be weak all season but it was not a good start. 

    The rest of the D, especially the secondary, will look much better if and when we get this down. But it does need to improve if we are going far into the playoffs.

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: New England Defense

    In response to glenr's comment:

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    In response to pcmIV's comment:

     

     

     

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

     

     

     

    You describe yourself perfectly

     

    So, it's exactly as I stated. I've taken 4 drives that resulted in no points, a turnover and 74 yards and am trying to spin them as negatives for the defense so that I can push my agenda that the rookie QB led offense was effective despite all of the efficiency stats to the contrary.

     

     

     



    Fixed that for you.  LMAO @ your spin.

     

     

     

     

     

     




    ^ Desperate men do desperate things. LMAO@U

     

     

     




     




    Another meatball to put on ignore. See ya, chump.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share