Bills Post Game

[MickeyDavis]

I've always wondered what percentage of plays AR changes at the line. Both he and MM have been asked but of course they won't say. Only that AR has the "option" to change any play.

As for Fuzzy, he was a great guy. ALWAYS friendly. Took a big financial hit when his string of restaurants went under. Had major health issues. And a friend to every Packer fan to the end. RIP.

[humanrefutation]

I don't think the Bills did anything out of the ordinary. Their pass rush, as apparently "vaunted" as it was, barely impacted the game outside of the strip that Mario Williams had against our backup RT. Despite that, Rodgers couldn't find open receivers (and his conception of an "open receiver" requires the tightest of windows), and when he did, he either missed the open receiver or had a drop.

Simply said, this wasn't MVP Rodgers. This wasn't average Rodgers. His receiving corp didn't step up, and the results were obvious.

The Bills have a good secondary (as do the Seahawks and Dolphins, two other teams we struggled offensively against this season). In our three least productive offensive performances of the season (losses to Seattle, Detroit, and Buffalo), Rodgers averaged 179 passing yards. In each of those games, Rodgers struggled to find open receivers.

Does that mean that Rodgers can't beat a good team? Of course not. We just beat the consensus #1 team in the NFL two weeks ago.

But we haven't performed as well against good defenses, and road performances have left much to be desired.

The elephant in the room this season was that the Packers had absolutely destroyed terrible teams and had torn apart crappy defenses, but had yet to display that capacity against good teams. We thought we exercised those demons when we beat the Patriots two weeks ago. That seemed to cement this team's "for real" status in the eyes of many.

I still think this team is for real, but I feel even less confident in their capacity to go to Seattle, play an excellent defense, and win.

[neiLz]

Yeah it was almost arrogance on both mccarthy and rodgers to think they could just pass the ball. I really hope they adjust going into the playoffs.

[paulpressey25]

Their pass rush, as apparently "vaunted" as it was, barely impacted the game outside of the strip that Mario Williams had against our backup

It really isn't about the sacks. The question is can your DB's rough up the Packers receivers coming off the line? Bills did that.

The other question is can your D-line put enough heat on Rodgers with only 4 guys to keep him in the pocket? Other than a couple scrambles, they did that also.

We've seen the movie before where a physical D takes a 35ppg Packer offense down to a 14ppg offense. I'm not faulting the Packers for not being able to overcome that. It isn't easy. But that's the task for that last four seasons and we can't seem to pass that one. (Although in fairness to the offense, they've put up adequate points in many of those losses and the D has collapsed)

Even so, we still win that game if the special teams doesn't crap the bed again. The question is whether that's all coaching or lack of talented 2nd and 3rd stringers to man it or a combination of both. I don't know the answer there.

[Flames24Rulz]

The thing that was perplexing to me was how they just didn't want to run the ball yesterday, even though it was working. If you go back to the Detroit game, the main reason why we lost that game, in my mind, was the playcalling. They stubbornly tried to run the ball time and time again, only for the offense to be facing 3rd & 8, 9, and 10 plus against a very good defensive line.

Yesterday, the opposite occurred. We were able to gash them with some big runs on quite a few occasions. Yet for whatever reason, McCarthy and Rodgers didn't want to run the ball when that was probably the best option for success. Lacy should've had closer to 25 carries instead of 15, and Starks should've had closer to 10 carries instead of just 4. That's what really lost the game. With as bad as the offense looked in the first half, I was hoping that we were going to dumb down the game plan in the 2nd half. Obviously that didn't happen.

[chuckleslove]

The thing that was perplexing to me was how they just didn't want to run the ball yesterday, even though it was working. If you go back to the Detroit game, the main reason why we lost that game, in my mind, was the playcalling. They stubbornly tried to run the ball time and time again, only for the offense to be facing 3rd & 8, 9, and 10 plus against a very good defensive line.

Yesterday, the opposite occurred. We were able to gash them with some big runs on quite a few occasions. Yet for whatever reason, McCarthy and Rodgers didn't want to run the ball when that was probably the best option for success. Lacy should've had closer to 25 carries instead of 15, and Starks should've had closer to 10 carries instead of just 4. That's what really lost the game. With as bad as the offense looked in the first half, I was hoping that we were going to dumb down the game plan in the 2nd half. Obviously that didn't happen.

Starks would have had the extra carries, Lacy was on a snap count as he isn't 100% healthy.

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Just because the d-line didn't get pressure doesn't mean they weren't doing their job. They did a great job of closing the pocket without allowing Rodgers to escape and get clear lanes. Too many teams try sacking Rodgers, which is nearly impossible, and end up allowing him to get into open space to see the field and break down defenses. I feel Rodgers is less effective in the pocket.

[ReasonablySober]

Yea, I thought their defensive line did a good job. Rodgers wasn't able to get comfortable at any point yesterday.

[humanrefutation]

Their pass rush, as apparently "vaunted" as it was, barely impacted the game outside of the strip that Mario Williams had against our backup

It really isn't about the sacks. The question is can your DB's rough up the Packers receivers coming off the line? Bills did that.

The other question is can your D-line put enough heat on Rodgers with only 4 guys to keep him in the pocket? Other than a couple scrambles, they did that also.

That's true to a certain extent, but I've always believed that whether you're in the pocket or scrambling, it's all about having enough time for your receivers to get separation from their defensive backs. They can only be expected to cover receivers for so long before someone gets open. Rodgers had enough time.

[paulpressey25]

Just because the d-line didn't get pressure doesn't mean they weren't doing their job. They did a great job of closing the pocket without allowing Rodgers to escape and get clear lanes.

And that was exactly the game plan that Belichick and the Patriots tried. Keep Rodgers contained rather than go all out undisciplined at him. The Patriot defense just wasn't physical enough to pull it off. The Bills were.

[Ron Swanson]

Even so, we still win that game if the special teams doesn't crap the bed again. The question is whether that's all coaching or lack of talented 2nd and 3rd stringers to man it or a combination of both. I don't know the answer there.

Special teams played like garbage, but to be fair, that was the 1st punt-return TD we have given up since 2011. It just sucks that it happened at such an opportune time for the Bills (when their offense was getting shut down).

Crosby also needs to get more height on shorter kicks and PAT's. I know the weather wasn't ideal, but a with his leg, a 45 yard FG shouldn't require him to line-drive it like that.

It was just such a fluky loss all around. Similar to the Redskins and Dolphins games in 2010. I lay the entire blame at the offense's feet.

[Ron Swanson]

Also, I hate to be "that guy" that harps on the officials, but the refs were letting the Bills DB's get away with an absurd amount of contact. I understand that they were just letting them play, which I usually agree with, but then don't turn around and call ticky-tacky holding calls on our O-line when we were gashing them in the run-game.

Even if you don't agree with the calls, I always at least expect consistency, and it was pretty clear that the way they were officiating the game greatly benefited Buffalo's game plan. It wasn't the reason we lost but it sure didn't help.

[packfan414]

with rodgers we have a chance, but i just can't imagine this team going into SEA and winning. choking away homefield is brutal

Arizona is still in 1st place.

They beat Seattle last year in Seattle. With their D anything can happen.

We beat Detroit and Arizona beats Seattle, we have a bye I think over Dallas, but Seattle would be a wild card, so any game with them would be in Lambeau

anything possible, but very hard to imagine arizona beating seattle this week. 3rd string QB and no ellington, their offense has been anemic

[packfan414]

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/machine

check out all the different scenarios. If SEA beats arizona and STL, we win out, and dallas wins out. SEA #1 seed, we're #2.

[emunney]

The distillation of all this stuff is that if we don't play a lot better than this, we are very unlikely to win a playoff game. For a while I thought we were going to win this one in spite of everything that went wrong, but the teams we'll get in the NFC playoffs (NFC South winner being the exception) will all be better than Buffalo.

I think what we need to remember is that every team is susceptible to something. Whether we're strong enough to overcome our weaknesses and win 3 in a row against good teams remains to be seen. I think we have seen that we're capable of that level of play.

[El Duderino]

Their pass rush, as apparently "vaunted" as it was, barely impacted the game outside of the strip that Mario Williams had against our backup

It really isn't about the sacks. The question is can your DB's rough up the Packers receivers coming off the line? Bills did that.

That didn't happen though, i don't know what you were watching. The Bills mostly played a zone defense in the secondary, not a lot of press man at the line of scrimmage. Same thing for the Lions loss in Detroit. Seattle plays more zone than press man coverage.

In fact, it's been just the opposite in most games where the Packers passing game has thrived. Defenses that play lots of man and press coverage have gotten eaten alive by our passing game for big plays. The Philly game a prime example. What has instead caused the Packers trouble is good defenses who rush four and play lots of zone. By doing so they force our offense to more methodically move the ball downfield vs all of the big plays the offense more typically thrives on.

[trwi7]

pp just loves to play the physical defense roughing up our weak offense card though.

[paulpressey25]

pp just loves to play the physical defense roughing up our weak offense card though.

I know, it's terrible that way that false narrative keeps hanging around for years now. You'd think people like me (and a zillion other fans and media) would learn by now the game is played with joysticks versus actual guys at the line of scrimmage. At some point we'll figure out how to get that "12:00am" on our VCR's to stop blinking.

Of course McGinn is a dinosaur as well:

On the other side, McCarthy had a 32%-68% run-pass ratio even though the unexpected strength of the Bills' secondary, the way referee Bill Leavy's crew was letting the bump of bodies go downfield

ETA: Inform the Bills as well that they didn't play physical.

"I feel like before playing us, watching film of his receivers, they were getting a pass by all these secondaries," said Aaron Williams. "As long as we got physical (outside) I felt like we had a chance."

[El Duderino]

Yea, I thought their defensive line did a good job. Rodgers wasn't able to get comfortable at any point yesterday.

There were plenty of times where Rodgers either had time to throw or when pressured he was able to step up in the pocket to have a clean throwing lane, but either receivers weren't open, guys dropped passes, and/or the receivers weren't on the same page with Aaron.

Then again, Buffalo has a really good defense. The week prior they held the Broncos to only 306 total yards and Manning to 179 yards, no TD's, and two picks in Denver. Looking at the scores of all Buffalo games, only New England has been able to score more than 30 points on that Bills defense. If they had a good QB, Buffalo would be a Super Bowl contender. I hadn't seen them play besides the Lions game in week five and while i knew they had a good defense going into the game yesterday, i didn't know it was that good, especially their secondary. I wrongly expected a fairly confortable win.

[crkone]

There was illegal contact all game against the Bills. Credit to them for getting away with it.