Thurman#1

Dang, that's an accomplished family!! Best of luck to him and them.

Not using Cook isn't head-scratching at all. It should have been completely expected, it was very predictable. In fact, it was widely predicted. It's how they use rookie RBs. In the first eight weeks of his rookie season, Singletary had 40 carries. And that was after he went four carries for seventy yards and six carries for fifty-seven and a TD in weeks one and two. Then in the second half of the season they started using him much more. Exact same thing with Moss, though they waited a few extra weeks before starting to use him consistently very much in his rookie season.

Just because he was injured there doesn't mean he'd have been injured here. There's no connection with the Bills, validation or criticism in an injury to McKissic. He himself must have been frustrated. They didn't use him as much or as well this year there. He's a good player and isn't getting the chance to show it in DC.

And .... boom. Missing the point, folks.

Nonsense, "most patient." What crap!! He's simply among the five or six absolute best coaches in the league, and Bills fans recognize it. He's doing a terrific job, and only a few people, no names of course, don't get that. And that thing about only five head coaches have five years or longer is a statistical fluke. Belichick had five full years with the Browns and a record of 36 - 44. As of last year, Zimmer was in his 8th year without an SB Reid had 14 years in Philly without a Super Bowl win. They had that longevity because they were very good coaches, even without Lombardis. As is McDermott. "Most patient." What crap!

Mental issues? Good grief, what is with you people. I guess mental issues are possible, but no reason to think it's White who has them.

Well, you'd be the one to know. Oh, wait, no. You have absolutely zero idea.

Haven't heard him for years and years after getting NFL Game Pass. So recently I have no idea. But as recently as around ten years ago he was really really good.

Hines has never averaged 5.0 per carry rushing. Running behind arguably the best OL in football the past couple of years he put up 4.3 and 4.9. Singletary has a higher career YPC behind a line that was clearly inferior. And Cook's YPR is way higher than 8. Not that I think Hines isn't going to be good. But the desperation to see him soon isn't really called for.

Beasley had training camp. And didn't run at RB or on STs, so his role was much less complex. Beasley also in the years when he was one of our best two or three options put up 11.6 and 11.8 Y/R. Hines has never been that dynamic. His high is 7.8. He's right, you're imagining a different Hines. Comparing him to Beasley or Davis just doesn't make sense.

Peterson absolutely did NOT say that he knew what play we were running. He did say that he knew two concepts we often use in the red zone. So he thought he'd see those concepts, but didn't know for sure. He was prepared for some types of plays we run in the red zone. And he did say that Gabe was running only in-breakers all day. (If that's true, it should absolutely be corrected. Gabe runs out-breakers really well. If they fell into a pattern this game without noticing, that does need to be addressed.) Most teams have red zone packages and go with things that have worked for them. So Peterson knew what types of things to look for. He did think that if the D went quarters he might see a dig or a double post, and Gabe was indeed running a post there. Peterson also says, "Everybody loves to run that." It's not just the Bills. But he had the right idea. But if he so clearly knew what was going to happen, how come it took a bad throw for him to make that INT? Peterson was beaten on the play. A good pass there is a touchdown. Peterson was behind and to the right. Allen threw low and behind, right to him. If he'd led Davis correctly and put it high, it was a touchdown. It was a pass that just wasn't good enough. Someone on here the other day said that it seemed Josh was forcing balls to Diggs and Davis. That's what seemed to happen that play. Two guys were opener on easier throws. That's a tendency, and probably one of Josh's rather than Dorsey's. That was the crucial bit of Peterson's quotation. He said, "Josh thought he had it, and like I said, Josh is a guy that trusts his arm strength. He's a gunslinger. Coach alluded to it all week. 'Stay plastered into your coverage. Stay tight into your coverage. He just might throw you one.' " Yeah, that's what happened. Three guys were open, the closer two very open and Davis a bit but the throw had to be perfect. Josh picked the receiver he most wanted there, the guy who was least open but furthest down the field, and he does indeed trust his arm. That throw had to be a really good one and instead it was, what, a yard and a half to the right and low and hard instead of thrown over the top. That was a shame. Most of the game he was his usual terrific self, but he had five or six throws that weren't up to his usual standards. That's how he's looked the past two or three games. And it's cost us.

Yes, I know that there isn't an offense in the NFL that doesn't require route memorization. But what you don't seem to get is that some require much more than others. It's not the same offense for all 32 teams, dude, it really isn't. Ours requires an awful lot more than others. Look it up. If you want to ignore this, that's your business, I'm not going to continue to tell you how wrong you are on this. Just look up Erhard Perkins. You will find the word memorization featured prominently. How the routes fit together is crucial. You're not just running your own route, it's how yours fits in with the spacing of the others as well.

Yes. In some systems it can work. In others it doesn't. The system we run requires memorization. Every route must be memorized. Again, if the main idea of an offense were whether or not it could be quickly learned, this would be really bad. But that is not the idea behind any offense. Some offenses fit it more easily than others. But the main idea is to be effective ... not to be easily used by a guy who arrived in mid-season. Thanks. This. "With that, it takes time," said Hines. And he's also working on kick returns, often as a blocker, something he's never done.

The purpose of an offense or part of an offense is not to be easy for a new guy to pick up. It's to work well. As we're the #1 offense and the #2 scoring offense, ours does. If it's easy, that's great. But not necessary. Because other teams do something does not mean that we need to do it. The Erhardt Perkins system for catching passes is what we were running last I knew. And it is indeed complex. "It was developed to maximize efficiency in cold weather." https://baltimoresportsandlife.com/erhardt-perkins-system-part-2/ Gee, I wonder why we use it. Don't know offhand whether Hines has used it before. But you don't bring in a guy because you want him to be useful his first two weeks. You want him useful long term. If he can do it his first two weeks, that's a nice bonus. But simply not important in the long run.

Indeed. I always appreciate your posts. Glad to know what you consider acceptable. I know during your time in the locker room, you've ... oh, wait. No one needs to simply accept anyone's claims. But Wawrow has a ton more access than you or I and if he says it's true, that carries weight. Players do tend to deny problems in the locker room, especially on the record. Off the record we'll never know what they say. But John very well may.

Like you're not constantly trying to be condescending. You're just not very good at it. And yeah, you didn't say it's all Dorsey's fault. You only said this: That's your whole post, and it really does basically mean that Dorsey's the problem. Which again, is nonsense. He's been up and down, but the offense has overall been very good this year. He deserves his share of the credit for that and his share of the blame for when they haven't performed well. But overall they've been very good. The idea that because the offense hasn't performed well in three second halves (and that we can then ignore the rest of the season) simply doesn't stand up.

They brought in Crowder. A very good slot. They thought between McKenzie, Crowder and Shakir they'd find somebody. And Crowder was supposed to be the safety blanket in case the other two don't work out or need more time. Unfortunately, he's injured.

Think Peterson's going to cover a guy who's been out of bounds and thus can't be first to touch the ball when he comes back in? Interestingly, the play he should have made there was to (unobtrusively) pull Peterson out of bounds with him so he also can't be first to touch the ball. I hadn't thought of that, but JT O'Sullivan pointed that out about McKenzie on this play during this video about Allen's problems and how he works even better when he can throw within the play design.

Nah. He doesn't need an offensive innovator, he needs a good offensive coach. Which Dorsey may well be, though you can't be sure yet, either way. And he certainly doesn't need an offensive innovator or a good offensive coach as head coach. At head coach, he needs a good head coach. Period. Was Brady handicapped because Belichick was a defensive specialist? More, there's no reason to think that McDermott isn't a great head coach. At the end of his fifth year as HC, Belichick was getting fired. As we know, it wasn't because he was incapable as a head coach. Oh, and his defense stopped them at the one-foot line. That's not crapping the bed. Anything but. And they did that despite about five starters being out. Sorry, that's absolute nonsense. They sure weren't perfect. That play where Lewis went for the INT rather than the knock-down sure was absolutely awful. But it wasn't a failure of coaching. Players make mistakes sometimes too. And yet the D played pretty well despite missing Edmunds (anyone else notice that things went downhill after he went out? 10 points, 151 yards, an INT, two punts and a turnover on downs in the first half when he was on the field), Poyer, Hyde, of course White and also Rousseau being out. I don't doubt they want another receiver. Nobody should doubt it. But you can't get everything you want. It doesn't work that way. Every team makes trade-offs. We've got a terrific roster. Oh, and Shakir may be that third pick-your-poison guy. Can't be sure but he looks good for how young he is.

It doesn't tell the defense when you are going to snap the ball. Gives them a general idea, but equally the receiver could settle, take off left or right in motion ... there are a million possible variations. Sometimes it tells, sometimes it's a fake, sometimes the crosser is going to catch a pass, it goes on and on. Defenses get some tendencies. Then you use the tendencies on them and do something else. It's not the same guy each time who pushes. Nor do they push every time. Nor do they push straight forward each time, sometimes Allen steps to either side. And again, the problem on that goal line play wasn't the play. It was the mishandled snap. Period. The middle of the line moved the pile pretty well, actually. I just watched the All-22 and Allen was going to have to get through a charging LB who had to leap into the air to reach the area. He does that with no problem if he actually had the ball.

You want to find somebody who's full of it? Look for someone using the tactic you're using here, admitting the other guy's argument is a winner by ignoring what he actually said and throwing out a straw man to distract. He didn't "compare Devin Singletary to Alvin Kamara," as you claim. He destroyed your dumb contention that the fact that Singletary hasn't cleared 1K means anything by pointing out another very good RB who also has not cleared 1K. There are many very good RBs who he could have also cited. Ekeler. Tony Pollard, Edwards-Helaire. Guys who are good but are in situations where they don't get a lot of carries. Yeah, you seem to be looking at the wrong team.

Yeah, Dorsey's doing a bad job. I personally find an offense that is #1 in the league to be abhorrent. Almost as abhorrent as an offense that is #2 in scoring. We've got to improve!! But clearly this tire fire is all Dorsey's fault and no blame can be laid elsewhere.

"Pretty much all of them won a SB within their first 5 years with the team," you say? Not Andy Reid. Not Cowher. And out of all of the SB-winning coaches mentioned there, nearly all proved teams stupid for firing them too early. Nearly all of the others were fired from one team before they won one. Clearly they were good enough to win a Super Bowl or were developing towards being good enough. Yet they were fired before doing so. Stupid mistakes by stupid teams. Firing a guy who eventually wins a Super Bowl is a mistake. It clearly wasn't him that was the problem. It was the roster, the locker room, the organization ... something. But Belichick in Cleveland wasn't incapable of winning a Super Bowl. Cleveland thought so, and was wrong. The problem was elsewhere. Same with Reid in Philly. And Carroll with the Jets and Pats. Arians, Gruden, Coughlin, Kubiak and Dungy. Having a short leash was butt-stupid by the eight teams that fired those eight coaches forcing them to win a Lombardi elsewhere. That's excellent evidence that the teams simply didn't have much of a clue about what their teams' problems were. Bad teams, bad thinkers really, love to find scapegoats. Hint: Belichick wasn't the reason the Browns couldn't win a Super Bowl when he was the head coach there. Reid wasn't the problem in Philly. Any thoughtful person could go on and on with the examples.

They didn't have a shot at stability. Daboll left. Allen lobbied hard for Dorsey. And you say that "The question should no longer be “is Ken Dorsey a good OC?” Frankly, yes it should. That's the question. Dorsey has had some problems, but also some terrific things. He's presiding over a 6-3 team that has the #1 offense and the #2 scoring offense. Is he responsible for that success? No, not he alone, certainly, but he's done his part. He's responsible for his share of their problems but also his share of their successes. Hunh. I could not have named Kubiak if you'd asked me who had coached that team. Interesting. Kubiak was never a guy who ate up much press time or ink, did he?

Good stuff, man.