.png.395d368d8b720b1e31cfea1d1789947a.png)
Mikie2times
-
Posts
8,798 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Mikie2times
-
-
2 minutes ago, Dr.Sack said:
To be fair Allen is such a duel threat that his passing ability gets more respect than his running. Allen is a pick your poison QB. Sit back in Cover 2 and he'll run over one linebacker spy. Blitz him and he'll hit the hot route, or find a way to juke the blitz and take off for 30.
Why is Allen a better runner in the NFL than college? I presume its because he has become stronger, smarter, and his supporting cast is better.
He's a passing scrambler, which is pretty rare. A few have existed. Probably the most comparable in ability to do both in my eyes would be Steve Young, but Josh is clearly much different than Steve Young. Both are passing scramblers but Young was like a symphony and Allen is like a Metallica concert. Young was much more refined. Allen is just a savage. Russell Wilson also has a similar game, but again, just much different. Any comp you can think of needs a touch of amphetamine, 3 inches, 30 pounds, and some uncle Rico.
-
3
-
-
2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:
I would break this down to a few things
First some players play faster than their 40 time.. the juice and adrenaline of a game hype you up
Second the offenses that Josh and Lamar Jackson were running were completely different.. Lamar got the benefit from a college offense that ran a spread option
Josh was also under center a lot more which makes it harder to run effectively... They weren't running standard read options like is typical in college ball
On the flip side.. Josh Allen's JUCO rushing stats were amazing
In 8 starts he had 660 yards and 10 TDs 5.5 average
So did the Bills REALLY know?
-
2 minutes ago, 947 said:
If you've seen Josh's 40 from the combine, it's clear he had no idea how to run a track sprint. His technique is awful & his arm movement is wacky. I doubt he trained with a running coach.
But running as a QB is different. You have a ball in your hand so your arm movement is more natural, and you don't start from a stance. In that regard, Josh's speed is elite. Same reason you see elite sprinters in the league who aren't good football players except when they run a fly route.
I think a lot of this is based on him being a stride runner. I think stride runners have that slower start and stop, but sneaky top end and if you put that in a TE's body with a FB's brain. The Josh Allen experience is certainly what to call it. Nothing like him exists.
-
9 minutes ago, Coach Tuesday said:
Josh was the rare athlete who was continuing to develop physically well into college and beyond. His running ability has simply and improbably improved post-college.
That is how I see it, it just couldn't have been missed in this obvious of a way. I see him growing into being even more athletic in the Pro's and then combining that with his competitive nature and a need to survive. I think he just was forced to try it more when he was a rookie and then built a ton of confidence in his ability likely starting with the leap in Minnesota.
-
Josh has turned out to be an elite running QB. It's a huge part of his game and has given us some incredible moments over the years with his hurdles and running over defenders.
I guess the question is, did the Bills know what he was capable of outside of some mobility? This isn't mobility, this is the 2nd best running QB in the NFL.
Josh ran an unofficial, 4.76 and in college had 767 yards on 237 carries, a 3.2 average
Lamar had an unofficial 4.34 and in college had 4,132 yards on 655 carries, a 6.3 average
Would anybody considered passing on Allen if they knew his ability to run was this strong? As far as arm talent, he was a consensus #1 in the draft. We haven't seen a prospect with top arm talent and elite running come out of the draft since Michael Vick. Running ability as a QB seems to be an area that teams don't really miss on in evaluation. It's shocking we have a guy who didn't flash it to this extent until his pro career.
Did anybody really know? Thoughts?
-
6
-
-
1 hour ago, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:
Am I the only one who sees a resemblance to Steve Carell?
Glad I scrolled up
-
It's more the team than just Josh, but really, for me, it boils down to winning a SB at this point. That is the standard the rest of his career as well as for this team. That's the accomplishment that says we were able to take all this unity, pride, and talent and be consistent with it against the best competition for 4 weeks. To me that's all he has left to prove.
-
1 minute ago, PatsFanNH said:
Amazing pick by Hyde! That was a perfect throw and he made probably the most impressive INT I have ever seen..
Classy as usual. It was nuts, looked like 6, came out of the frame so late.
-
1
-
-
Bill has no idea how to deal with Allen's hybrid ability.
-
2
-
2
-
-
If I'm an opposing fan, Allen has to be so demoralizing. Almost like what it felt when Jones scrambled for the two first downs on the opening drive but just all the time.
-
2
-
-
Despite our rejuvenated running game, I see Bill going more in the mold of the 1990's Giants. Control the ball. Force Buffalo to win with the RB run game.
-
I live under a rock, turning my TV on only for games and Netflix. Radio only for music. This year I watched more YouTube and ran into his takes with Tasker and Chris Brown. Then I saw Angry runs etc. He's one of the few people I will spend time watching. I never understood his connection to Buffalo but he seems to have one? I see some negative posts. Has our brand gotten so strong that we get to pick who talks about us now and not just be happy we get some national pub?
-
6
-
1
-
-
It's good work OP. I'm very familiar with AV, it's not an exact science but the guys at pro football reference do great with data collection and simple summary. All they attempted to build with AV is a way to compare different positions or the same positions across different eras. AV is far from perfect but anybody that slights it, I would happily challenge to create a better ranking system for what they're attempting to capture. They will even admit it's flawed in the summary but still fun and informative.
-
Slick ball, very difficult on the kicking game. Many of us remember the #1 coldest game and the very memorable play from Tasker. I will never know if The Raiders meant to squib it, but Tasker plucked a kickoff line drive and returned it inside the 3 yards line shifting momentum. We score, then missed the extra point. That didn't happen with Christie. It's going to be hard on kickoffs, extra points, and any field goals with length. I used to do some kicking in addition to more masculine roles, but it's incredible how different it is to kick a ball that's slightly deflated vs very inflated. You get way more distance on a partially deflated ball. When it's cold like this you just don't get any recoil with the football. It doesn't travel. It's also very hard to hold onto and catch. Concerned about our punting unit after last week. You also know damn well Bill knows the science I'm describing with football pressure and temps better than anybody. They will probably be blow torching balls on the sidelines prior to FG's.
-
1
-
-
Edmunds and Hughes need to join the Rodney Dangerfield club of Buffalo. Over the years our fan base at times has been in strong contrast with our coaches. I'm not talking about positions that are easy to see like QB. More with positions that have assignments that benefit the team and not always the individual. Out of all my gripes I do think McDermott is a good defensive coach. So when it comes to these two it's hard for me to knock them when I don't always know what is being asked of them. It's very hard for me to say just because Jerry doesn't have X amount of sacks or Edmunds doesn't have X amount of big plays they suck. I really don't know. To me it has enough "careful what you wish for" to stay neutral and positive on both.
-
1
-
-
Just now, GoBills808 said:
I think the argument is that at least the variance in taking the +EV play is a known element, whereas going 'by feel' is simply throwing darts blindfolded. Reducing variance is a function of going for it more often, not less.
I never suggested you go by feel and that alone. I said it's somewhere in the middle of math and common sense. Hence my example of risking your life savings at 60 years old with a 30% EV. It's statistically the correct decision, but very few would ever consider such a thing. I disagree with your comments over variance in the course of one game or even one season or even many seasons for one team. Just not enough trials for the data to stabilize. A really easy way for a great team to get beat by a horrible one is do things like go for it on the 18 yard line. It generated a potential 17% swing in win probability on a singular play. If your team is better, you don't want to introduce those type of events voluntarily. As you stated yourself, you use the data as an outline and part of the decision making process. Even the correct decision statistically can equate to pure gambling depending on the context.
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:
So basically capturing 30% EV doesn''t convince you, but you're going to allow yourself to be informed by a difference of 17%? Where is the logic in that?
In the example I stated, under a singular trial, I don't have enough trials to risk my life savings even with a 30+EV at the age of 60. That would be mathematically the correct decision, but in real life, I'm pretty certain even most statisticians would not take that proposal. In the situation Staley faced, I would rather extend the trials/plays I have with the Raiders because I feel I have the better team. Last thing I would want to do is introduce a huge amount of variance into the equation by doing things like going for it on my own 18 yard line even if it does come with a 3% EV.
-
If I said you have a 65% chance of doubling your money and a 35% of losing it all, one outcome, like a coin flip, would you say yes? Maybe when your 20, probably not when your 60. That's the root of the problem with some of these guys. Staley looked at the decision as a +3% win probability in a binary way. Where another way to look at it, still from a statistical perspective, is you're electing to create a 17% swing in win% based on one play by going for it. Is that something worth doing midway through the 3rd quarter in a 3 point game? Further, is that worth doing vs a team that really wasn't doing much offensively without the refs help? Last part bringing more of the old school football mind into it. I really would like to think right answer exists in the middle of it all.
-
1
-
-
7 hours ago, NickelCity said:
But they didn't.
I think this is correct
-
Cool. Look, the Bills have played 3 meaningful games with the Patriots the last two years. I do not consider the 2nd game last year as meaningful. By that time we basically had the division locked and New England was down to 2nd string players.
We could be 3-0 in those games or 0-3. All of them were close and decided in final minutes. Even in the last game which for some reason people seem to feel we completely exercised the demon, we converted a 4th and 1 on an incredible play by Josh late in the 4th. Fail to convert on that play and New England has the ball and is driving for the W. This is after outgaining them by 140 yards and being +2 in the turnover column.
It would be completely out of the context of how these games have gone for anybody to assume it won't come down to a couple plays late in the game on Saturday. Further, for anybody to assume we have established some sort of supremacy, our biggest edge just got fired in Miami. For some reason Bill could never figure Flores while Buffalo handled them with ease.
It feels as if we have the edge, yes, but people consistently overestimate by how much.
-
At the end of the day I'm fine with it. So much of our offense comes from Josh doing what Josh does with broken plays. We have a ton of weapons and didn't exactly set the world on fire. If he leaves it's next man up.
-
4
-
1
-
-
4 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:
Judas Priest. It defies understanding how anyone who has attended a bad weather wind game in Rich Stadium would ever question how much those conditions will impact a passing game and a teams offensive efficiency. My only conclusion is that those who are claiming that the high winds and freezing cold are just an excuse for inconsistent offense play have never actually sat out in a game in those conditions.
I call these people out as frauds.
With the wind, Buffalo 24 and the Jets 10
Against the wind, Buffalo 3 and the Jets 0
I honestly think the wind will eventually become a massive advantage for this team as it was for the 90's Bills. Allen just plays worse, his competition can't even function. Think Baltimore last year, New England, Jets game......
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
I don't think any of us live long enough to see the 2007 Patriot's +315 broken. Beat the Giants and they go down as the best team of all time in any sport.
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, ganesh said:
If he was a great run defender, I am sure Miami and Jets would not have released him.
I wouldn't be so sure. We released him after he had a rather solid season for us, jut not worth the cost. We weren't going to pay a premium for a guy whose primary skill was run defense. Miami decided to really pay a premium for that and I feel it's likely because they thought he could be more than a one dimensional player. Jets inherited that premium. Most teams are not looking for rotational DE's for run defense. They want them for pass rushing. That said Shaq was always impossible to move off his spot, he just had very little speed and edge rush to his game. Very one trick pony, think 3-4 DE in the early 2000's, something Rex Ryan might covet.
Josh Allen's Running Ability
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
He looks so tiny in that video. He's developed so much physically.