GoBills808

no the subtext of the WR criticisms is some fans want to win a championship and some fans are more concerned about where to lay the blame

it's not the personnel on defense, it's the system. and it's always going to get exposed postseason. there's no reason to think this year will be any different so yes, the offense needs to be better

it's not broken it just needs to be better to win a Super Bowl

it is so much easier to play QB when you're throwing at guys like Chase and Higgins I still remember Mahomes chucking it downfield to Hill and getting rewarded w some of the most ridiculous catches having guys like Chase/Hill etc that can just make you right as a QB in all situations, on all throws is such a benefit

Burrow's fine Jared Goff tier

Not surprising coming from a rookie Guys who have been here know better by now to take anything from regular season chiefs games

ok so after watching it a third time i still don't think it supports the idea that you should run the ball at a higher frequency than passing what i think he calculated is at what frequency your defense is indifferent, in terms of expected yards, to whether the opposing offense throws or runs

i got it 👍 ok so i have to ask- is he graphing the optimum run/pass mix on offense or did he actually graph the optimum run/pass playcall on defense? i think those are two separate things

I only see where he graphed the scenario wherein defenses react rationally to corresponding changes in run/pass%?

of course i watched it lol it's not game theory either, it's just faulty logic his proof at is based on the premise that defenses are 100% efficient in matching pass plays w 'pass defenses' (no data for what that entails) and vice versa...which we know is not the case as evidenced by the wind bowl vs the Patriots that one year

i don't know where you get that from in most game conditions except when WP is approaching 100 it's optimum to pass more and EPA of run plays is only +EV compared to passing when WP is 13% or lower ie teams should be passing over 70% of the time

please nobody hates running the ball well...what i do hate is the kind of 1985 'nothing puts more pressure on an opposing defense than a good running game' type thinking we are ABSOLUTELY trying to run out the clock. that is literally the whole point of running the ball at the highest rate in the NFL. and what that produces is fewer possessions, the majority of which are inordinately run heavy (which is not in fact as capable of 'hitting big plays' as passing the ball has always been +ev compared to rushing on average, not even taking into account a QB who accumulates EPA and TDs at an historic rate) the concept that a james cook run puts more pressure on a defense than a josh allen pass is both historically and practically ridiculous

i mean that seems to be the plan I don't have a lot of confidence in it working. trying to play ultra conservative small ball offense puts a premium on winning on the margins (fewer posessions mean points/play -/drive become more important, maximizing efficiency of timeouts and playcalls, clock management, coherence of offense+defense in gameplan and down/distance situations, etc)...that all requires a very steady hand at the wheel. and that's just never been our strong suit leaning into this ball control style exerts more pressure where we're weakest imo. it's a philosophical mismatch. trying to shorten games and playing for par just puts the whole team into a box...we need the kind of offense that can put pressure on opposing teams' offenses because they can't afford to waste a possession, not the kind of offense that wants to trade TOP for more series/game. in trying to stick to 'complementary football' they've somehow managed to design a team that addresses flaws instead of enhances strengths. i just don't think it makes sense

Actually the one time we did try to out-offense the Chiefs we had the game won in 2021 Last couple times we've played them in postseason we've tried ball control and they just grind us down

also skewed by the Ravens game where we threw 46x (and scored 41pts) so let's not pretend there isn't sample size bias every snap on offense is an opportunity to pass. we have fewer attempts because 1- we want to run the ball/control the clock and 2-we lack the receivers and scheme to maximize those opportunities

if only it were so simple unless you think we're 30th in attempts for no reason

we get chastised as spoiled for wanting to get rid of McDermott and his zero SBs but dont blink an eye at the Steelers thinking of canning Tomlin

the bigger difference is Tomlin has a SB ring

have you been watching the pass pro this yr? Would you characterize it as upper tier? or better yet, just answer this: imagine a QB completing 68% of his passes for 12 TDs/4 INTs, 6th in ypa, league average in sacks...w the receivers we currently have. How much better do you need that QB to play? MVP level? Probably is what you're saying, right...so anything other than MVP level play from Allen means he's to blame? I mean ffs you just did it yourself when Mahomes has a couple down yrs- 'oh he had a bad oline' YES he had a bad oline and some questionable pass catchers (not as bad as us, but still)...I'm not going to blame him for 'reading defenses' or 'adjusting protections' poorly because there are contributing factors. He didn't just forget how to play, and neither did Allen. there are REASONS why these things happen

im genuinely curious in this take after witnessing the lowest negative play rate in history last season Did Allen not 'adjust protections' last season? If he did, why couldn't Mahomes? Maybe Allen forgot how to do it this year and Mahomes suddenly remembered? and yes, Allen 100% makes the pass pro look better than it actually is

Take a breath lol I'm agreeing w the premise, I don't think there's anything wrong w the offense that isn't by design

I mean who's talking down to who(m)...the guy explaining his model or the guy correcting his grammar

Correct Put it this way- if you have fewer attempts AND lower ypa you are truly ***** passing wise

I don't care how much English you think you know, correcting grammar on a message board is the height of dbaggery

if you think that second clause in the post you quoted is an example of using language properly I have some bad news for you