Mikie2times

Dominant like last year or balanced and dominant?

We have built a very good team no doubt. I'm discussing balance more than anything. Poor OL play or leads do not resolve our lack of a RB ground game or our ability to stop the better teams who can run the football. These issues have plagued us each of the last 3 years and since the start of our run. Is this something we have to address or not?

I don't see that fixing everything

I wanted to evaluate if this team is built the correct way. As an example, the Run In Shoot is a heralded system littered with statistical champions that has won exactly zero championships in college or professional football. That said, it appeared like it could be the right way for a long time until it was clear it wasn't. Was the no huddle offense the right way? We did win a lot with it, but we also never won a Super Bowl (I'm not saying it wasn't the right way, but it did have consequences playing that brand of football, good and bad). Say you're excellent at assembling the right talent for the vision you have, as the Oilers were, as Polian was, as Beane and McDermott seem to be, it might still get you nowhere if you have the wrong vision. Offense To start off, evaluating this with Josh Allen makes it very hard. He accounts for a massive portion of our run game and also generates a lot of yards in broken plays. At times common sense needs to prevail. Would anybody question since the start of the Josh Allen playoff era we have not had a consistent or successful running game with our RB's? Our actual rushing stats don't matter to me. Those include Josh, which is why it makes it hard. But you can see it, taste it, hear it. We have had no consistent run game with our RB's since the start of the Josh Allen playoff era. We also know Daboll is very tilted toward the passing game sometimes even to the extent that we just give up on the conventional ground game all together. We have spent heavily in players geared to develop the passing attack and have for years. In sum, our vision on offense seems to be very clear. We are ok complimenting our QB driven run game with our RB's and being a predominantly passing team. Defense We have a decided advantage against the pass vs the rush in just about every stat conceivable. Our first pick of the Beane era was a DB, our 1st round MLB was certainly known for his range and length. Our DL selections have been dominated by pass rush guys first with very little focus on players better suited to stop the run. In yards per rush allowed since 2019, we have the ranked 19th/24th and 7th this year. In yards per pass allowed since 2019 we have ranked 3rd/9th and 1st this year. Advantage passing defense. Again, at times common sense needs to prevail. It would certainly appear like we have focused on building a defense that is very focused against the pass. KC Link? While this is a passing league, it is not common to find comparable teams to the way we have been built. The only team I can think of with a similar profile as ours is Kansas City. In fact if you look at the year KC won the Super Bowl in 2019 they were about as close to a clone as any team has been to the 2020 Bills (so far the most successful version of this team), KC was 2nd that year in passing yards per attempt, 5th in passing yards per attempt allowed and 29th yards per rush allowed. Compare that to the 2020 Bills at 3rd/9th/24th respectfully. It starts to make you wonder, did we build the team in the form of KC to begin with or did we build the team to compete against them? No Balance On defense, 50% of our games since 2019 have involved 100+ yard outputs by the opposing offense and we are a .500 team in those games, 1-3 this season. Since our first playoff run in 2019, the Bills are 12-12 when they allow over 100 yards rushing on defense and 20-4 when they don't. On offense the Bills are 7-11 when they rush for under 100 yards, and 25-5 when they rush for over 100 yards. The running game does REALLY matter to our success, if nothing else in painting a statistical picture of what we have seen. If you can run on us we are most likely involved in a competitive game. If we abandon the run or can't run, we most likely are involved in a competitive game. In all likelihood both of these things are probably occurring at the same time. By these standards we will be involved in enough very competitive games that we have a ceiling over our head. Yes, we rank 7th in rushing yards per attempt this year and yes, our defense is the best it's ever been this year, but that should scare you even more as we have allowed two 200+ rushing efforts against us this year. Last year it was the same. Like Josh Allen and the offense, our defensive success can be hard to evaluate at times. What we do to teams when we are ahead makes it difficult to evaluate how good we are in situations when the game is competitive. We destroy teams when we know the pass is coming. So I like our 7th rating in rushing yards per attempt this year, but I'm certainly not going to become disillusioned into thinking we have a high caliber rush defense. Too many brutal thrashings have occurred in the last 3 years for me to ever consider that to be true. Almost as if we are watching an option team against us. In Sum I don't want to depend on Josh Allen having an MVP season for us to have a chance. He is still growing and I can't imagine what he could look like with some competency out of his RB driven run game. I also don't feel we can depend on our defense to hold up against teams that are good in the run game. It rarely does. Yes, KC won a Super Bowl but they're largely a soft team by my estimation and most certainly an outlier of SB champions. Very few teams that are poor on either side against the rush have ever won a Super Bowl. Most have some degree of balance or at least respect the notion of balance. A lot of the pieces are already in place for this team. I'm curious what we do after the season is over. Does Beane and McDermott stay with Daboll which makes our offensive direction unlikely to change? Do we look at some OL that are not pass centered and go after some mass in the middle? This is a potential Super Bowl team. The talent level is very high, but we are certainly capable of screwing that up if the vision isn't correct. I would like to see more balanced football.

I agree completely and noticed the same pattern, but I also notice the pattern of us getting absolutely shredded on the ground. This defense is built for pass only football on both sides of the ball. At some point our leadership needs to see that balance in this game matters.

Probably best to build a defense that doesn't require more than the allotted number of players on the field to be in the box to stop what is known to be coming. I don't blame Poyer or Hyde for that or the heart of the Bills defense.

People are pissed and I get it, but please don't defend this question. This defense isn't failing to stop the run because of effort. We have no interior mass. We are built as a pass defense only. Poyer and Hyde have been studs for us for awhile and always leave everything on the field. It was a classless look at me question trying to get the goat of two guys minutes removed from a devastating loss. If anybody should be asked that question it should have been the HC or the GM for the way this team is built. Not a couple DB's.

This also isn't the end of the clip, Hyde keeps talking as he walks off the podium in disgust of the question. He never goes Jerry Springer mode, but he was talking well after Poyer had left the frame completely.

It's been over 40 years since a team (hard to make out, discussing the amount of runs vs passes) won a game, does that embarrass you?

I can't come close to calling that a drop either. It looked like one on TV but that was a horribly difficult ball to try and catch. I can't imagine how much it was moving in the air and as a result it ends up directly over his helmet which gives you no ability to see the ball. All he could do is extend his hands and hope he could feel it in and he damn near pulled it off.

When a team loses enough games they should have won, Steelers, Titans, Jags, and now Patriots. They eventually lose the right to get this benefit of the doubt. They just are a losing team.

If Kelly could navigate this, Allen can as well. What we need is balance. Both our offense and defense are designed around the pass with little to no consideration to the run. Having a dome isn't going to increase the strength of our interior lines. If Kelly could navigate this, Allen can as well. What we need is balance. Both our offense and defense are designed around the pass with little to no consideration to the run. Having a dome isn't going to increase the strength of our interior lines. If Kelly could navigate this, Allen can as well. What we need is balance. Both our offense and defense are designed around the pass with little to no consideration to the run. Having a dome isn't going to increase the strength of our interior lines. If Kelly could navigate this, Allen can as well. What we need is balance. Both our offense and defense are designed around the pass with little to no consideration to the run. Having a dome isn't going to increase the strength of our interior lines. If Kelly could navigate this, Allen can as well. What we need is balance. Both our offense and defense are designed around the pass with little to no consideration to the run. Having a dome isn't going to increase the strength of our interior lines.

Lee Evans, Winfield, Takeo, Clements, Fletcher.....I get a lot of these guys didn't play forever. If you drop Fitz from your list, I will drop everybody from mine. I agree Wood and Kyle stand out, really, Kyle stands alone if you want to get more granular.

I think both McDermott and Beane have done an excellent job executing a vision. I just don't know if that vision is going to prove best. I'm a bit envious of how the Colts constructed the team they have and the system they run. It's a very balanced team. If I had concerning thoughts about direction: I think we can be fine on defense, but we need physicality. We are too built for the pass and seemingly dependent on Star to bring any level of physicality. If he is that critical, find a viable back up. We do not have one and it shows when he doesn't play. On offense I feel we are way too reliant on the pass. We need to be able to run more traditional sets and run the ball. I question if Daboll is the right guy for the job. Daboll is to the passing game as Roman is to the running game and while both can be clever, I feel like too much of anything is a bad thing. Give me balance. If you notice both our offense and defense is heavily centered around the passing game. Which is fine, it's a passing league, but at times the lack of balance really shows in our physicality.

Brieda is cot capable of carrying a significant amount of the workload. He is undersized and will get destroyed running between the tackles. What Buffalo is doing is focusing on using him on the edges and he does well in those situations. I would like to keep seeing that, but don't kid yourself into thinking this guy can do anything more.

I think the growth is for the fan base. This is a team that will compete for a playoff spot. You are what you're. We have never looked any better than that this year and until we do, no reason to buy into hype.

Its going to be exciting to compete for a playoff spot this year

I'm going to be anti Bills and just focus on winning the division for now. We can talk about home field once that is clear.

I'm posting a couple links to sites that focus on notable 3-4 DE's and 4-3 DE's in NFL history. It's slightly outdated, but does as good job as far showing the difference in production from 3-4 DE's vs 4-3 DE's. The last link is All Time Sack leaders comprised of 3-4 OLB's and 4-3 DE's. You see a rare DT exception as well and then Bruce, who might as well be on an island as far as this list is concerned with 3-4 DE's. I think Buffalo took probably the best defensive player in NFL history and put him into a scheme that helped decent LB's and a a poor secondary. Who knows, the entire defense was likely built around Bruce being able to subtract two players every down. I will not disrespect what Reggie did and say he was worse, but I can't do it to Bruce either. 3-4 Best DE's https://nflfootballjournal.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-top-3-4-defensive-ends-in-nfl.html 4-3 Best DE's https://nflfootballjournal.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-top-4-3-ends-in-nfl-history.html Career Sacks Leaders http://www.espn.com/nfl/history/leaders/_/stat/sacks

Maybe at Oklahoma State

What's funny is arguably the next closest thing to to the 2,000 in 14 games is Browns 1,863, with a 6.4 AVG. OJ was worse at 6.0 AVG in his 2000 yard year. In sum, If Jim Brown got the carries he would have had a better year, but it's similar to the White/Smith debate. Bruce got it partly because he played longer. In evaluating GOAT shouldn't that play a role? Just as it plays a role to get that high in fewer games? One requires more top end production and one requires more endurance, consistency and ability to avoid injury. Both are different but equally important traits. As poster said, this like picking your favorite guitarist. I would never say either was better, just different.

But, but, he was a Deacon.... If Reggie was still alive who would you rather invite over to meet your family? Who would you rather go to the bar and have a beer with? Depending on your values maybe that's a different answer, but I think Bruce is a real guy and when he had any problems he has been real about what they're. He seems like a genuinely solid person. Reggie did the lords work which gave him a lot of curbside appeal but he probably had a few skeletons packed in with that squeaky clean image. I value authentic people the most and I think Bruce was more authentic.

I considered this heavily prior to posting, but still don't think it happens which gives it even more respect. In theory it should be broken. It would be akin to passing stats and those will topple easily. That said it seems to be very hard to stay healthy in today's NFL as a DL for the time required to hit this milestone. Somebody already mentioned OJ's 2,000 in 14 games, which is just dumb. That said, Jim Brown did have a competitive year against that in 1963 with almost half a yard more per carry, he just fell short of the 2,000 by a little. I think the rushing records will the very difficult to break for many of the reasons you discuss. Buffalo played a a bend but don't break style of defense and never had a NT that was capable of demanding attention in Jeff Wright. That left a Guard and Tackle to regularly block Bruce. As I recall the Bills did move him around a little just trying to avoid double teams. Reggie played with Buddy Ryan for a part of his career and a much more talented front with the Eagles than we had in Buffalo. I don't remember his conditions in Green Bay as clearly. I don't have a problem stating Bruce played for a less aggressive defense and was double teamed more frequently. The former is just obvious from watching the Bills. Walt Corey was certainly a bend but don't break DC. As far as double teams, it would be nearly impossible to have the protection in a 3-4 you get in a 4-3 regardless of how your DC schemes. The alignment in a 3-4 just doesn't allow a DE to stay protected. For some perspective on this within the top 10 career sack leaders, none are 3-4 DE's besides Bruce. 6 More DE's in the top 10, all 6 are 4-3 DE's. 3-4 DE's being known as legends are so rare, it's almost like Buffalo put Bruce in the position they did because they knew how rare he was and it would always occupy two blockers and even still he would beat it. Nobody like Bruce exists as far as production in a 3-4 role. I know you didn't speak to this, but I also don't understand why people keep citing the QB protection rules. Shorter passes, sure. I would read this article if people are curious on that. https://www.vocativ.com/falsestart/376061/nfl-sack-rate-decline/index.html Agree completely. For me, Reggie was the most powerful DE of all time and had the best bull rush I've ever seen. Bruce was certainly powerful but had more athleticism and had the best spin move I've ever seen. I really don't know that you can argue one is better than the other.

I think it's lazy to default to Reggie as so many do based on so many less games to get to his 198. Being a 3-4 DE vs a 4-3 DE matters ALOT. Plenty of reasons you can make an argument for either but a lot of people stop comparing after that one fact and I don't feel it tells the whole story.

Ya I corrected that