Bills757

Yea, if you wanna shakes things up, start Peterman. But dear God, don't let him throw 5 picks in the first half before deciding to take him out. It killed the team's chance to win AND it could have lasting negative effects on Peterman as well.

IMO you're missing the point. Scheme and approach are two very different concepts. Whether it's a WCO or a traditional passing attack isn't the issue. It's the calls within the schemes that set the tone for an offense. You can go conservative in pretty much any type of scheme.

So why is it that Dennison called 40% less pass plays in the second half and continually ran McCoy after so many negative run plays? Why is it that Denver fans complained about the same approach by Dennison that we're discussing now? Taylor wasn't the QB in Denver. The fact your'e trying to blame the conservative play calling on the QB is laughable. Dennison calls the plays and it's not a coincidence he goes into his shell when the Bills have a lead.

It's obvious to me, when a coach goes conservative, the players know it. The mentality of playing not to lose versus playing to win takes over. The team get's tight and production slows. McD allows this to happen. If there's a year where you experiment and go for the jugular in games like these, this is the year. There are certainly times when you go conservative to run the clock, but it appears McD is overly conservative too early in virtually every game when the Bills have a lead. Why not try and step on Miami's neck, score a few more times and have some momentum going into NE? As it stands now, even in the case of getting the W, the offensive unit has to feel at least a little dissatisfied with their second half performance which doesn't help their confidence going into next week. So it's the QB's fault that Dennison keeps running Shady up the gut for 3 yard losses? It's the coach's responsibility to set the tone on offense, not the QB. Dennison's play calling was very obviously conservative in the second half when the Bills had the lead. The same has been said about Dennison when he was in Denver. Taylor threw 18 passes in the first half and 11 in the second half.....that's 40% less opportunities through the air. Whether Taylor sticks around or not next year, I'm not crazy about Dennison's approach and nor am I happy McD allows it to happen. The turtle approach won't be bringing any championships to Buffalo, that's for sure.

How many times did McCoy need to get tackled for a loss before Dennison thought about trying something else?

Say what you want about the players but IMO Dennison needs to hit the bricks.

I agree. You are. Haha. So Peterman gets pressured big time and throws 5 picks yet Taylor ADDS to the Oline’s problems. I have to applaud you for taking such a leap with that statement.

The Oline blows!! They’re terrible. The run game wouldn’t have been great if it weren’t for McCoy and to some extent Taylor. Again, you can bring the perfect pocket passer to Buffalo but unless the Oline is upgraded, he’s gonna get crushed and possibly injured. Did the Peterman experiment not open your eyes? He had zero time to throw (most of the time) and was no threat to run the ball. And McCoy actually put up some yards in that game. Add in the fact the Bills have no deep threat. Taylor throws one of the best deep balls in the NFL yet management decides not to provide a WR that can stretch the field. If the Bills don’t go heavy on OL and DL in the draft and waste a first round pick on a QB, they’re bigger fools than some of the posters on this board.

It's funny how fans like yourself wants to indict Taylor on his offensive numbers yet it's very apparent the Oline sucks and the WR corps isn't nearly as good as many other teams. Add in the fact Shady's had more so-so games this year than the last two. And let's not forget Dennison and his "go-for-broke" approach (sarcasm) and you get what you get. Peterman plays, throws five picks in one half and all of sudden we have an Oline problem....like it didn't exist when Taylor was the QB. The simple truth is Taylor masks the crappy Oline and rather than throw balls up for grabs, he opts to tuck and run. If Dennison would actually play to Taylor's strengths (getting him outside the pocket and actually running him), we might see a better offense. You can't tell with a straight face that Dennison's approach with over two minutes to go last week was smart. Carry on though.....I'm sure you can't wait until the Bills draft a "franchise QB". Better hope Beane and McD do something about the Oline or else said "franchise QB" will be on the IR faster than you can say Billsy.

Agree with your first comment 100%. The Oline is the most important unit on the offense. It allows the skill players to do their jobs. But you know how people think on this board.....they think a "franchise QB" can overcome a bad Oline.....THE guy can somehow make throws from his back and lead the Bills to the SB. That's why I chuckled at the suggestion the Bills take Eli Manning and how that would somehow be a major upgrade.

When you run it up the gut, yes, I would agree. If Dennison would actually call games to the strength of his unit, I think the results can be better. Throwing 5 passes in the second half was not the right approach. I think it's interesting how McD and Dennison were all-in on Peterman playing against the Chargers to see if he could "jump start" the offense....and they were obviously willing to turn the ball over evidenced by actually letting him throw 5 picks in one half. Then, all of a sudden, against the Chiefs, it's back to ultra conservative? Why is that? Why not open it up, get Taylor running the ball more...encourage more high-risk plays. It's classic Jekyll and Hyde. Part of me thinks McD and Beane simply don't want Taylor to have success....they'd rather just bide their time and release him.

Can't argue that; however, when the offense has a chance to actually seal a game with a first down, IMO, you try to do just that. There's a difference in doing what the Bills did versus the offense actually putting the game away and I think it has an effect on the next game and future games. By putting the game away you give the offense confidence which is important and sometimes underrated by some.

I agree. The play calling was as if there was only 40 seconds on the clock. It was beyond ridiculous....not one play action short pass to maybe catch the Chiefs off-guard? One first down would've been huge.

Couldnt have said it better! +1

Again, unless Eli can accomplish such feats with the Bills' Oline, your statement is moot. Soooo, who's he gonna throw the deep balls to, and, how is he going to have time to wait for the WR to run that far to throw a deep ball?

If we were to bring a Manning in to be the Bills' QB, I'd take Peyton over Eli....even now. Peyton's one of the best all-time and is a team leader....Eli? Not so much.

Haha. How about TOO MANY times? That better? Be careful what you wish for because if Eli came to Buffalo and we had the same Oline, he'll get crushed. Then you'll get the sour puss attitude he's so famous for and that'll be that.

Unless Eli can magically learn to complete passes from his back, it won't matter. I laugh at you people thinking a pocket passer with no wheels can step in and instantly make this team better (assuming the same Oline is protecting the QB). Peterman's inexperience aside, the dude was a statue and he got planted into the LA turf more times than I could count.

I'm with you. Rudolph looks to me the type of QB who has enough velocity to get it done. He also has really good touch and some wiggle to extend plays.

One thing to keep in mind, though, is the fact the Big12 simply doesn't play defense. It's across the board. it's not because the offense are extremely prolific....a lot simply has to do with the fact defenses in that conference blow. There are a total of two defense from the Big12 in the top 50 in total defense (TCU at 18 and Iowa State at 46).

Only McD and Beane know who they'd choose between two players. In the end, they'll choose the guy they think will give their team the best chance to win. There are risks involved, for sure, by choosing someone with character flaws (I'm talking in general...not about Mayfield).....it's the whole risk-reward type of thing. Case in point was Michael Vick. Andy Reid felt he could work with Vick and have success....Reid felt Vick deserved a second chance....and to some extent, it paid off on the field. Vick kept his nose clean, paid back all of his creditors and has been doing the right things even after his playing days. It's kinda like Shady said about Kaepernick......he's simply not good enough to counter balance his baggage. And he's right. I wouldn't pick a guy like Kaepernick for all of the distractions and the fact he's not good enough to overcome them.

I think Rudolph has more upside than Mayfield.

The Giants have been out of the playoff picture. Why not try someone different? The Bills were squarely in the playoff hunt and McD benches Taylor for someone he said could spark the offense.LOL.

The rumors have been out for several weeks. When Sumlin was obviously on the hot seat, the rumors started swirling. Great recruiter.....just not a great in-game coach.

The tricky part about evaluating talent in college is the fact the talent disparity is so great in college. OU has way more talent than most of their opponents so it's hard to really gauge Mayfield's talent. Is he really that good? Or is the other team that bad? It may seem unfair to bring this up but there's some truth to it. It's a big reason why EJ got drafted so highly (along with his measurables). While FSU wasn't at its greatest when EJ was there, they always had talent at the skill positions which benefited EJ.