Are the Bills that good? The Chiefs that bad (1 Viewer)

[Chase Stuart]

The last couple of years, a few of us staffers have been contributing to the NYT Fifth Down blog. I'll be doing an article every Tuesday during the season. This week: http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/are-bills-that-good-and-chiefs-that-bad/?ref=football

This time last year, I wrote that an opening day loss wasn’t necessarily a harbinger of things to come. But Week 1 isn’t meaningless, and no team knows that better than the Chiefs. Last season, Kansas City pulled off the biggest upset in Week 1 and rode a hot start directly into a division championship.

This past weekend, no team exceeded expectations like the Buffalo Bills. The Bills were initially listed as 6.5-point underdogs to the Chiefs, although speculation about Matt Cassel’s injury drove the point spread down to 3.5 points by kickoff. But by either measure, a 34-point victory was nothing short of shocking. The Bills covered the point spread by either 40.5 or 37.5 points, depending on your perspective. The largest opening day “cover” in modern history came in 1997, when the Jets shocked the Seattle Seahawks, 41-3. The Jets were coming off a 1-15 season and were 6.5-point underdogs in Bill Parcells’ first game with the team. The season ultimately ended with a 9-7 mark.

From 1978 to 2010, only seven teams (1) were an underdog in their season opener, (2) covered the point spread by at least 30 points, and (3) won 6 or fewer games in the prior season. Five of those seven teams ended up winning at least half of their games, and two (the ‘00 Eagles and ‘06 Ravens) made the playoffs. The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots. So what was the key to the Bills’ success?

They’re not going to make anyone forget Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith and Michael Irvin, but the Bills have a nice set of triplets. Ryan Fitzpatrick was flawless against the Chiefs and passed for four touchdowns; since the start of last season, Fitzpatrick and Tom Brady are the only quarterbacks with three games with four passing touchdowns or more.

Rest of article available at the link: http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/are-bills-that-good-and-chiefs-that-bad/?ref=football

 

[Raiderfan32904]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots.

yeah, no.Back to reality next week for the Bills. And then the week 3 showdown leaves the Bills 1-2.

This article must have been published before the late game last night.

Oh, and the Chefs are just that bad.

 

[Trizzler]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots.

yeah, no.Back to reality next week for the Bills. And then the week 3 showdown leaves the Bills 1-2.

This article must have been published before the late game last night.

Oh, and the Chefs are just that bad.

McFadden is a great player, but he alone can't beat the Bills. The Raiders didn't play sensational ball last night, Kyle Orton was just that bad. The defensive pressure that Oakland sustained was certainly effective, but the Denver O-line was more effective than a Kardashian in allowing male athletes into the backfield. Fitzpatrick looks to be about 10 levels ahead of Campbell right now, and Stevie Johnson is a much better threat than any Raiders receiver. We should expect a major shootout, but I think the Bills reinforce just how strong the AFC East is.

 

[aburt19]

The majority of the success of the Bills is because the Chiefs played badly on defense. They tackled poorly and did a bad job of covering

receivers. I should know because I watched the game.

I won't even hazard a guess as to how good/bad the Bills are because in order to do that I'd have to see them play a quality team.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff.

Chase-Is this true? I mean instinctively we all assume it to be true, because a team would be tired and would have less time to recover from injuries and so on. But has there ever been a statistical analysis showing this to be true? You would assume the same thing regarding performance after bye weeks (more time to rest and gameplan), but I believe studies have shown that in fact that is not really the case, at least not to any significant degree.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

I should know because I watched the game.

That sounds like it could be the new "...I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night."

 

[Judge Smails]

a bit of both? I've been concerned with the Chiefs - they just looked horrible the entire preseason, and I don't think most teams can just turn the switch off/on. Like last year, the Bills will be able to have games where they can put up a lot of points - but I'm probably not alone in thinking that good defenses will shut them down.

 

[Ever Present Lurker]

 

[Chase Stuart]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff.

Chase-Is this true?

I mean instinctively we all assume it to be true, because a team would be tired and would have less time to recover from injuries and so on. But has there ever been a statistical analysis showing this to be true? You would assume the same thing regarding performance after bye weeks (more time to rest and gameplan), but I believe studies have shown that in fact that is not really the case, at least not to any significant degree.

Climate change and unfamiliarity with surroundings are all part of the reason for HFA. For example, Jets-Patriots or Giants-Eagles or Browns-Steelers don't show much HFA because they're in similar climates and the teams play there every year. Oakland rarely goes to Buffalo, the climate is different, and obviously it's very, very far away.Here are some thoughts on West coast teams playing at 10 AM: http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/38404/west-coast-teams-uphill-fight-with-nfl

As for the short week, I don't know if it matters all that much generally. But I have to think if it ever has an effect, this would be the time. Short week, early game, west to east is an ugly combination.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I get that Buffalo is very, very far away. But no longer live in the days of the horse and buggy. Plane rides are fairly quick. I don't see how the weather in September is that much different on either coast. The Raiders will train, eat and sleep on east coast time all this week. I don't see the west to east being significant going either way. The better team wins. Period.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I get that Buffalo is very, very far away. But no longer live in the days of the horse and buggy. Plane rides are fairly quick. I don't see how the weather in September is that much different on either coast. The Raiders will train, eat and sleep on east coast time all this week. I don't see the west to east being significant going either way. The better team wins. Period.

We're not talking about binary outcomes here. Just a matter of degrees. HFA is usually worth 3 points. I'd say it's worth 4 or 5 this weekend. That's all -- but maybe it drops the Raiders' odds of winning from say, 50% if it was a neutral site game, to 35%. Not a shocking upset by any means if the Raiders pull it out, but the smart money says the Bills win.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Now can you write one in the same vein with the Ravens and Steelers?

 

[Sweet Love]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots.

yeah, no.Back to reality next week for the Bills. And then the week 3 showdown leaves the Bills 1-2.

This article must have been published before the late game last night.

Oh, and the Chefs are just that bad.

McFadden is a great player, but he alone can't beat the Bills. The Raiders didn't play sensational ball last night, Kyle Orton was just that bad. The defensive pressure that Oakland sustained was certainly effective, but the Denver O-line was more effective than a Kardashian in allowing male athletes into the backfield. Fitzpatrick looks to be about 10 levels ahead of Campbell right now, and Stevie Johnson is a much better threat than any Raiders receiver. We should expect a major shootout, but I think the Bills reinforce just how strong the AFC East is.

First off, love the bolded analogy...will steal that from time to time.I also like your comparisons...I could care less whether McFadden goes off or not. The difference between him and Fred Jackson is finite compared to the passing game of Buffalo vs Oakland. I really think that Buffalo can go into that Pats game at 2-0.

 

[Raider Nation]

Back to reality next week for the Bills.

I appreciate your confidence in our boys, and I believe we'll run on anyone, but our secondary is raw and Fitz is no joke.This game is a coin flip.

 

[Resident A]

The Buffalo Defense is for real. This is not the same D that was a sieve against the run the past 2 years. They've added Shawne Merriman, Nick Barnett, & Marcel Dareus to go along with Kyle Williams & an already strong secondary. We're looking at a potential top-10 Defense. McFadden may have run for 200+ against the 2010 Bills, but it'll be much harder to get yards this year.

The Bills Offense relies mainly on 3-step drops, very quick reads, and short to intermediate routes. This will work well against the Raiders' pressure. Also, Buffalo uses 3 & 4 WR sets most of the time, there will mismatches-a-plenty in the passing game.

 

[Area51Inhabitant]

The Bills do look like they have a pulse this year but that's still a far cry from being a good team. The Defense is looking more stout than its been in a while. Fitzpatrick had a nice game and if he can keep the bad decisions and poor throws to a minimum then this offense has a chance to be better although good defensive fronts will probably shred this oline. 7-9 to 8-8 is probably not out of the question. I'm not buying in just yet although the next 2 weeks could easily change my mind.

 

[TobiasFunke]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff.

Chase-Is this true?

I mean instinctively we all assume it to be true, because a team would be tired and would have less time to recover from injuries and so on. But has there ever been a statistical analysis showing this to be true? You would assume the same thing regarding performance after bye weeks (more time to rest and gameplan), but I believe studies have shown that in fact that is not really the case, at least not to any significant degree.

Climate change and unfamiliarity with surroundings are all part of the reason for HFA. For example, Jets-Patriots or Giants-Eagles or Browns-Steelers don't show much HFA because they're in similar climates and the teams play there every year. Oakland rarely goes to Buffalo, the climate is different, and obviously it's very, very far away.Here are some thoughts on West coast teams playing at 10 AM: http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/38404/west-coast-teams-uphill-fight-with-nfl

As for the short week, I don't know if it matters all that much generally. But I have to think if it ever has an effect, this would be the time. Short week, early game, west to east is an ugly combination.

I know about HFA and the variations. I was asking specifically about the "short week" effect, removing all the other variables.

I ask because it's often repeated as if it's an unassailable truth, but I've never seen any really convincing evidence in support of it (or for that matter challenging it). That ESPN study obviously is some sort of anecdotal evidence, but it ignores the fact that during the time frame of the sample, east coast teams may well have simply been better than west coast teams. During the relevant time frame used in that blog entry not one West Coast team secured a wildcard playoff berth, which suggests to me that the West divisions lacked for depth, in which case you'd expect them to find road games against other West teams easier going than trips to the East. Obviously there's a chicken and egg problem there since it's possible they didn't get those wild card berths in part because they had an extra hurdle to climb with the travel, but it's still pretty damning.

Do you know of any other analysis of this other than the ESPN blog entry? I think it'd be useful information both for fantasy football and for betting on games (if I ever did such a thing, which of course I would never do).

 

[Chase Stuart]

The Bills do look like they have a pulse this year but that's still a far cry from being a good team. The Defense is looking more stout than its been in a while. Fitzpatrick had a nice game and if he can keep the bad decisions and poor throws to a minimum then this offense has a chance to be better although good defensive fronts will probably shred this oline. 7-9 to 8-8 is probably not out of the question. I'm not buying in just yet although the next 2 weeks could easily change my mind.

With home games against Tennessee, Oakland and Denver and lining up to face Cin, the conference schedule outside of the division is pretty good (@SDG is almost certainly a loss, but they can take 2 or 3 of the other ones). Drawing the NFC East isn't easy, but they get Washington at home after a bye week. Beat KC + 3 of Ten/Oak/Den/@Cin/@SD + Was + 1 of NYG/Dal/Phi gives them six wins. A 2-4 division record might be optimistic, but that gets them to 8-8. They're probably looking at 6 wins before the two Miami games, so how those games go may dictate whether they get to .500 or not. Obviously a little bit of luck gets them to 9-7 with a legit chance at the playoffs.It's super, super early, but Buf-Oak could have big WC implications if the Jets or Steelers have a down year. NE, Bal, Hou and SD seem like obvious choices for the playoffs, but after the Jets and Steelers, I'd put the Bills, Dolphins and Raiders at 7-9. So if the Jets or Steelers slip up, this Bills/Raiders game could decide who gets the 6 seed. Because after Buf/Oak/Mia, there's a dropoff to #10(Jac?) and the rest (Ten, Cle, Cin, Ind, Den, KC).

 

[GroveDiesel]

As excited as I am by Buffalo's big win and Fitz's performance, calling to flawless isn't really accurate. He had a number of terrible passes that managed to all fall incomplete rather than be intercepted.

The scary thing about Buffalo's defense is that they actually held back and played a base defense with just 4 rushers almost the entire game. They got up so big so early that they rarely run or pass blitzed

 

[Apple Jack]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots.

yeah, no.Back to reality next week for the Bills. And then the week 3 showdown leaves the Bills 1-2.

This article must have been published before the late game last night.

Oh, and the Chefs are just that bad.

And the Raiders are reality? Your bias is showing. Buffalo is the favorite for good reason. It's not a walkover, by any stretch, but they are the better team.

 

[Abraham]

I think that the two most underrated offensive skill players in the NFL are Jackson and Fitzpatrick. I could see this team winning 9 games, easily.

 

[Apple Jack]

I think that the two most underrated offensive skill players in the NFL are Jackson and Fitzpatrick. I could see this team winning 9 games, easily.

And Stevie Johnson would be included here if his ADP hadn't elevated the way it did this year. Though, he might still be a little underrated.

 

[Thorpe]

The Buffalo Defense is for real. This is not the same D that was a sieve against the run the past 2 years. They've added Shawne Merriman, Nick Barnett, & Marcel Dareus to go along with Kyle Williams & an already strong secondary. We're looking at a potential top-10 Defense. McFadden may have run for 200+ against the 2010 Bills, but it'll be much harder to get yards this year.

The Bills Offense relies mainly on 3-step drops, very quick reads, and short to intermediate routes. This will work well against the Raiders' pressure. Also, Buffalo uses 3 & 4 WR sets most of the time, there will mismatches-a-plenty in the passing game.

And they got rid of Pozluzny, which was addition by subtraction.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

 

[GroveDiesel]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots.

yeah, no.Back to reality next week for the Bills. And then the week 3 showdown leaves the Bills 1-2.

This article must have been published before the late game last night.

Oh, and the Chefs are just that bad.

I think the Bills have a lot more holes on the team than this week's huge win showed, but I would think that if Raider fans learned anything last year, it would be that beating a fellow AFC West team doesn't really give you a very good indication of how good your team is.That's something I think that most Bills fans are also wary of or should be if they are not.

The problem for the Raiders this week I think, is that McFadden could run for 150 yards and they'll still lose. He'll have to have 180+ for the Raiders to win.

 

[Run It Up]

The Bills are that good and the Chiefs are that bad.

Look forward to them sweeping the Jets.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Oh, stop it.Nobody is smarter than Vegas- if they were they'd be on a private island doing piles of blow off the private parts of a harem of Kate Upton lookalikes, not on a fantasy football message board. Vegas says the Bills are favored in this game. Maybe by the end of the season that won't look right, but at the moment that's a fair assessment of most likely outcome of the game given all of the information at hand. If you think you know more than Vegas, hey, good luck getting on that private island, and when you do let me know if you need an assistant.

 

[Apple Jack]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Ridiculous. The Bills offense proved last year that they can put points on the board when up against a less than stellar defense. They proved that again, in spades, on Sunday, putting up 41 points. I don't care who they're playing, though they were playing a 10-5 playoff team from last year, putting up 41 points is a strong performance. They also shut down an offense that includes a pro-bowl QB, a top 5 ADP fantasy RB, and the number one fantasy WR from last year. The Raiders got played tough by the Broncos and needed a knuckle-headed personal foul leading to a record-setting field goal to win. That was an ugly game. You got one thing right...we'll see on Sunday. I'll take Buffalo -4.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

no way the Bills are that good, but the Chiefs might be that bad.

If the Raiders want to take 15 more penalties, then I like Buffalo's chances at home here.

 

[Gottabesweet]

Bills fan here, think the game also will be close, Buffalo still gave up 6.0 YPC and think McFadden will gash us. The Chiefs stopped running as they were down quick. The bounces all went our way in that game and wasnt used to it. Not sure how the Raiders secondary will fare vs the spread though. The Raiders have a very good front seven, and the Bills line will look to build of allowing just one sack last week although the Chiefs didnt blitz much.

I did notice how strong Oaklands corners are and press often. Hoping that Roscoe and then our tall goonier WR's dont have trouble getting off the line.

2-0 would be nice though. The Buffalo radio is only looking forward to NE game a week ahead. I cant listen to them anymore.

 

[az_prof]

The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots.

yeah, no.Back to reality next week for the Bills. And then the week 3 showdown leaves the Bills 1-2.

This article must have been published before the late game last night.

Oh, and the Chefs are just that bad.

This is how I see it. Fitzgerald has had games like this before but neither he nor the Bills have shown an ability to win games consistently, especially against good competition. Color me skeptical.

 

[Apple Jack]

The answer to the question is neither of the above. The Bills can be good and the Chiefs are a bit of a mess right now.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Apparently ESPN thinks the game was a fluke as their new power rankings have the Bills at 27 and Chiefs at 21.

 

[renesauz]

No way Oakland wins in Buffalo if they don't find some semblance of a passing game.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

no way the Bills are that good, but the Chiefs might be that bad.If the Raiders want to take 15 more penalties, then I like Buffalo's chances at home here.

agreed all around.

 

[General Malaise]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

 

[General Malaise]

The last couple of years, a few of us staffers have been contributing to the NYT Fifth Down blog. I'll be doing an article every Tuesday during the season. This week: http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/are-bills-that-good-and-chiefs-that-bad/?ref=football

This time last year, I wrote that an opening day loss wasn’t necessarily a harbinger of things to come. But Week 1 isn’t meaningless, and no team knows that better than the Chiefs. Last season, Kansas City pulled off the biggest upset in Week 1 and rode a hot start directly into a division championship.

This past weekend, no team exceeded expectations like the Buffalo Bills. The Bills were initially listed as 6.5-point underdogs to the Chiefs, although speculation about Matt Cassel’s injury drove the point spread down to 3.5 points by kickoff. But by either measure, a 34-point victory was nothing short of shocking. The Bills covered the point spread by either 40.5 or 37.5 points, depending on your perspective. The largest opening day “cover” in modern history came in 1997, when the Jets shocked the Seattle Seahawks, 41-3. The Jets were coming off a 1-15 season and were 6.5-point underdogs in Bill Parcells’ first game with the team. The season ultimately ended with a 9-7 mark.

From 1978 to 2010, only seven teams (1) were an underdog in their season opener, (2) covered the point spread by at least 30 points, and (3) won 6 or fewer games in the prior season. Five of those seven teams ended up winning at least half of their games, and two (the ‘00 Eagles and ‘06 Ravens) made the playoffs. The Bills have a good chance to run their record to 2-0, as the schedule makers did Al Davis’s team no favors. Oakland has to make a cross-country trip on a short week and play in Buffalo with a 1 p.m. kickoff. A win over the Raiders win would set the stage for the biggest game in Buffalo in years, a Week 3 showdown against the Patriots. So what was the key to the Bills’ success?

They’re not going to make anyone forget Troy Aikman, Emmitt Smith and Michael Irvin, but the Bills have a nice set of triplets. Ryan Fitzpatrick was flawless against the Chiefs and passed for four touchdowns; since the start of last season, Fitzpatrick and Tom Brady are the only quarterbacks with three games with four passing touchdowns or more.

Rest of article available at the link: http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/are-bills-that-good-and-chiefs-that-bad/?ref=football

Nice article, Chase. Read it this morning on the john and had no idea you wrote it. Very impressed.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

 

[Sinrman]

From what I saw in the preseason (granted it IS the preseason), the Chiefs look absolutely HORRIBLE. I don't know what is up with them. I think the Bills

were underrated going in. They have slowly put the pieces together and I think could be sniffing .500 this year, kinda like Detroit. The loss of Eric Berry

only compounds the problems for the Chiefs.

 

[General Malaise]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

Well, yes. The Raiders just don't travel well to the East Coast. It doesn't matter who the coach of this team is (I mean really, the revolving door of coaches for this franchise is beyond ludicrous) the fact of the matter is that when the Raiders fly to the East Coast to play they don't win very many games.After a late MNF game in Denver, the team had to travel back to the Bay Area, practice with a short week and then hope back on a plane to play what will be a 10am game for their bodies. That doesn't translate into any sort of edge for the Raiders this week. I don't care if John Madden is coaching them.

I wish you luck, but the success rate isn't very good. Sorry.

 

[Da Guru]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

Well, yes. The Raiders just don't travel well to the East Coast. It doesn't matter who the coach of this team is (I mean really, the revolving door of coaches for this franchise is beyond ludicrous) the fact of the matter is that when the Raiders fly to the East Coast to play they don't win very many games.After a late MNF game in Denver, the team had to travel back to the Bay Area, practice with a short week and then hope back on a plane to play what will be a 10am game for their bodies. That doesn't translate into any sort of edge for the Raiders this week. I don't care if John Madden is coaching them.

I wish you luck, but the success rate isn't very good. Sorry.

Also not very good scheduling by the NFL. It does not make sense to send a west or east coast team cross country after playing an away Monday Night game.

 

[Raider Nation]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

Well, yes. The Raiders just don't travel well to the East Coast. It doesn't matter who the coach of this team is (I mean really, the revolving door of coaches for this franchise is beyond ludicrous) the fact of the matter is that when the Raiders fly to the East Coast to play they don't win very many games.After a late MNF game in Denver, the team had to travel back to the Bay Area, practice with a short week and then hope back on a plane to play what will be a 10am game for their bodies. That doesn't translate into any sort of edge for the Raiders this week. I don't care if John Madden is coaching them.

I wish you luck, but the success rate isn't very good. Sorry.

Also not very good scheduling by the NFL. It does not make sense to send a west or east coast team cross country after playing an away Monday Night game.

Wait, the league did something to screw the Raiders? NO WAY.

 

[General Malaise]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

Well, yes. The Raiders just don't travel well to the East Coast. It doesn't matter who the coach of this team is (I mean really, the revolving door of coaches for this franchise is beyond ludicrous) the fact of the matter is that when the Raiders fly to the East Coast to play they don't win very many games.After a late MNF game in Denver, the team had to travel back to the Bay Area, practice with a short week and then hope back on a plane to play what will be a 10am game for their bodies. That doesn't translate into any sort of edge for the Raiders this week. I don't care if John Madden is coaching them.

I wish you luck, but the success rate isn't very good. Sorry.

Also not very good scheduling by the NFL. It does not make sense to send a west or east coast team cross country after playing an away Monday Night game.

Wait, the league did something to screw the Raiders? NO WAY.

Don't the Raiders do a better job of screwing themselves? Penalties, JaMarcus Russell, Hayword-Bey, Lane Kiffin, Art Schell, hiring an offensive coordinator who was running a Bed & Breakfast, Javon Walker. And now it's the NFL that's screwing the Raiders over? Come on, man.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

Well, yes. The Raiders just don't travel well to the East Coast. It doesn't matter who the coach of this team is (I mean really, the revolving door of coaches for this franchise is beyond ludicrous) the fact of the matter is that when the Raiders fly to the East Coast to play they don't win very many games.After a late MNF game in Denver, the team had to travel back to the Bay Area, practice with a short week and then hope back on a plane to play what will be a 10am game for their bodies. That doesn't translate into any sort of edge for the Raiders this week. I don't care if John Madden is coaching them.

I wish you luck, but the success rate isn't very good. Sorry.

Also not very good scheduling by the NFL. It does not make sense to send a west or east coast team cross country after playing an away Monday Night game.

Wait, the league did something to screw the Raiders? NO WAY.

Don't the Raiders do a better job of screwing themselves? Penalties, JaMarcus Russell, Hayword-Bey, Lane Kiffin, Art Schell, hiring an offensive coordinator who was running a Bed & Breakfast, Javon Walker. And now it's the NFL that's screwing the Raiders over? Come on, man.

Yeah, that's all a rumor now, in the past. The here and now is Hue Jackson and Al Saunders. The here and now is the Raiders #1 run D, and #2 run O. The here and now is WINNING Baby!

 

[General Malaise]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

Well, yes. The Raiders just don't travel well to the East Coast. It doesn't matter who the coach of this team is (I mean really, the revolving door of coaches for this franchise is beyond ludicrous) the fact of the matter is that when the Raiders fly to the East Coast to play they don't win very many games.After a late MNF game in Denver, the team had to travel back to the Bay Area, practice with a short week and then hope back on a plane to play what will be a 10am game for their bodies. That doesn't translate into any sort of edge for the Raiders this week. I don't care if John Madden is coaching them.

I wish you luck, but the success rate isn't very good. Sorry.

Also not very good scheduling by the NFL. It does not make sense to send a west or east coast team cross country after playing an away Monday Night game.

Wait, the league did something to screw the Raiders? NO WAY.

Don't the Raiders do a better job of screwing themselves? Penalties, JaMarcus Russell, Hayword-Bey, Lane Kiffin, Art Schell, hiring an offensive coordinator who was running a Bed & Breakfast, Javon Walker. And now it's the NFL that's screwing the Raiders over? Come on, man.

Yeah, that's all a rumor now, in the past. The here and now is Hue Jackson and Al Saunders. The here and now is the Raiders #1 run D, and #2 run O. The here and now is WINNING Baby!

After one week? Against maybe the worst team in football?

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Ridiculous. The Bills offense proved last year that they can put points on the board when up against a less than stellar defense. They proved that again, in spades, on Sunday, putting up 41 points. I don't care who they're playing, though they were playing a 10-5 playoff team from last year, putting up 41 points is a strong performance. They also shut down an offense that includes a pro-bowl QB, a top 5 ADP fantasy RB, and the number one fantasy WR from last year. The Raiders got played tough by the Broncos and needed a knuckle-headed personal foul leading to a record-setting field goal to win. That was an ugly game. You got one thing right...we'll see on Sunday. I'll take Buffalo -4.

first it was 10-6...

second, anybody that actually watched the Chiefs last year knows that they were not as good as their record and inflated individual stats indicated.....they benefited from possibly the easiest schedule in NFL history.....heck BUF almost beat them last year in KC when the wind was blowing about 60 miles an hour.....

going into this season, the Chiefs may actually be a better team then they were last year but their record will be way worse.....as a KC fan with everybody healthy I had them penciled in for 6-10 (reverse of last year) with one of those 6 being the first game.....they will be lucky to get the other 5 now....if you look at what they really did last year, it really wasn't that impressive.....they are not very good....losing Berry and Moeki doesn't help....

oh and Cassel is Garrard like pedestrian.....and that may be in insult to Garrard....

 

[Run It Up]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Ridiculous. The Bills offense proved last year that they can put points on the board when up against a less than stellar defense. They proved that again, in spades, on Sunday, putting up 41 points. I don't care who they're playing, though they were playing a 10-5 playoff team from last year, putting up 41 points is a strong performance. They also shut down an offense that includes a pro-bowl QB, a top 5 ADP fantasy RB, and the number one fantasy WR from last year. The Raiders got played tough by the Broncos and needed a knuckle-headed personal foul leading to a record-setting field goal to win. That was an ugly game. You got one thing right...we'll see on Sunday. I'll take Buffalo -4.

first it was 10-6...

second, anybody that actually watched the Chiefs last year knows that they were not as good as their record and inflated individual stats indicated.....they benefited from possibly the easiest schedule in NFL history.....heck BUF almost beat them last year in KC when the wind was blowing about 60 miles an hour.....

going into this season, the Chiefs may actually be a better team then they were last year but their record will be way worse.....as a KC fan with everybody healthy I had them penciled in for 6-10 (reverse of last year) with one of those 6 being the first game.....they will be lucky to get the other 5 now....if you look at what they really did last year, it really wasn't that impressive.....they are not very good....losing Berry and Moeki doesn't help....

oh and Cassel is Garrard like pedestrian.....and that may be in insult to Garrard....

I said earlier in this thread I think the Bills really are that good and that the Chiefs really are that bad. I realize now that it needs to be qualified by a reason.The point you made about the chiefs is essentially how I feel about them, inflated - lacking talent.

As far as the Bills go, how good they are remains to be seen but last year they played hard all year, lost to the Pats by 8, the Ravens by 3, Steelers by 3.

Being a Jets hater I would go as far to say they are the 2nd best team in that division, obviously an unpopular opinion, but to say they are as bad as they were in 2009 is dumb.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Since this had turned into the Bills vs. Raiders thread, thought I'd point out that DHB was injured in practice today. With Ford already looking sketchy for Sunday, the Raiders could be down to Moore and ??? as their starting WRs. McFadden could very well be seeing 8 and 9 in the box all day long.

 

[Raider Nation]

Since this had turned into the Bills vs. Raiders thread, thought I'd point out that DHB was injured in practice today. With Ford already looking sketchy for Sunday, the Raiders could be down to Moore and ??? as their starting WRs. McFadden could very well be seeing 8 and 9 in the box all day long.

His production will be impossible to duplicate.

 

[Vision6]

Lot of East Coast Bias in this thread. We'll see on Sunday. k?

Raiders are 6-26 on the East Coast. Must be the 'bias'.

I'm not interested in history of the last 7 or 8 years. That was a different coaching staff, different teams. What you did was state the obvious. They had sucked for quite awhile. Is there anything significant about that record that applies to this team?

Well, yes. The Raiders just don't travel well to the East Coast. It doesn't matter who the coach of this team is (I mean really, the revolving door of coaches for this franchise is beyond ludicrous) the fact of the matter is that when the Raiders fly to the East Coast to play they don't win very many games.After a late MNF game in Denver, the team had to travel back to the Bay Area, practice with a short week and then hope back on a plane to play what will be a 10am game for their bodies. That doesn't translate into any sort of edge for the Raiders this week. I don't care if John Madden is coaching them.

I wish you luck, but the success rate isn't very good. Sorry.

Also not very good scheduling by the NFL. It does not make sense to send a west or east coast team cross country after playing an away Monday Night game.

Wait, the league did something to screw the Raiders? NO WAY.

Don't the Raiders do a better job of screwing themselves? Penalties, JaMarcus Russell, Hayword-Bey, Lane Kiffin, Art Schell, hiring an offensive coordinator who was running a Bed & Breakfast, Javon Walker. And now it's the NFL that's screwing the Raiders over? Come on, man.

Yeah, that's all a rumor now, in the past. The here and now is Hue Jackson and Al Saunders. The here and now is the Raiders #1 run D, and #2 run O. The here and now is WINNING Baby!

After one week? Against maybe the worst team in football?

So every claim you make is correct, every claim you disagree with is wrongWhat a great system you have there