Tanoros
-
Posts
431 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Tanoros
-
-
2 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:
Allen is reaching new levels of play. I honestly believe he hasn’t even reached his ceiling yet. Imagine what he would do with another high end speed WR. Allen is going to be the greatest player to ever play the game when all said and done, I’m fully convinced. Imagine what he would do with better line play and a receiving back. I think this is the year everyone in the league will be picking their jaws off the floor.
I agree with all you said about Allen. I also strongly believe he will be considered the best to ever play when it’s all said and done. I hope this upcoming season we get to see both Knox and Davis break out (among others, namely some defensive guys).
-
32 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:
And you get 4 downs the whole drive. Deferring offers a lot of benefits. Going first is only a benefit if you elect to go for 2 and go up 8 points.
Why are so many saying going first only offers benefit if scoring 8 points? Last I checked scoring wasn’t automatic. There are several ways to bring about a 3rd possession, and not all OT’s come about because two offenses are unstoppable.
-turnovers, punting, trading fg’s. There are several ways in which the third possession can come about. While I agree with the sentiment of taking the ball second, I don’t think it’s such an obvious choice.
-
7 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:
I was extremely excited last season, but going into this season is the most optimistic I’ve EVER been. We are stacked in nearly every facet of the game. I feel like our defense is now getting to the point where they are talented enough to win games on their own, let alone thinking we have a crew of honey badgers on offense. I honestly could see an undefeated season this year if we have a really good draft.
I love your optimism, and this is also the best I’ve felt about an upcoming season in along time. However, adversity is a common theme in the NFL, and the 2022 Bills will face it as well. Most likely that adversity leads to losing a game or two. However, Allen is the key. Depending on his play, your guess could be spot on. If Allen plays anything close to playoff Allen most/all of next season. Man, we will be very hard to beat, much less force a punt 😉
-
2 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:
I look at it exactly the opposite way.
Team 1 has little control because they have no way of knowing what team 2 will do. They are trying to score, but then have to decide on going for 2. No matter what they do - they can not win on that first drive - only dictate what team #2 needs to do to win.
Team 2 knows exactly what they have to do to win when they get the ball. Did team 1 punt or kick a FG? Did they score and kick and XP or get stopped at the 45 yard line? Did they get a TD and make a 2 pt or miss the 2 point conversion? Team 2 knows exactly what they have to do to win and prevent team 1 from getting the ball back.
Literally the only way team 1 is guaranteed to get the 3rd possession is a TD and 2 pt on the first drive - even then they don’t win - they only guaranteed a shot with the 3 possession. The 2nd team gets the ball and in most instances has a shot to win the game on their possession.
While I agree with much of what your saying about the reasons for the getting the ball second (especially because we have Allen), I want to make one important correction.
You said the only way for a 3rd possession is if team 1 scores a td and 2pt on the first drive. This is wrong. The 3rd possession can happen multiple ways.
-both team fail to score and punt.
-both teams have turnovers/turnover on downs.
-both teams score field goals-both teams score td and xp
-both teams score td and 2pt
Many of us Bills fans are viewing this OT rule through the lens of the Bills/Chiefs playoff game, and acting as if it’s a given both teams score td’s, but that’s not the case.
6 minutes ago, The Red King said:One advantage to getting it first. If you drive deep but don't score, you punt and pin them very deep, maybe even close to their goal line. Get a three and out and you get good field position and only need a FG now for the win.
Many are not considering this part in having the ball first. This is the reason I keep saying the right answer is highly dependent on the game/game flow.
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, Billsrhody said:
+1 to this
For all the folks referencing the "advantage" of going second and being able to go for it on 4th down and go for the 2 point conversions. How is that an advantage is the team that goes first can do those things as well (and probably should)?
The team that gets the ball first can go for 4th downs sure, but they also run the risk of giving the second team great field position only needing a fg to win. The second team doesn’t have this worry, because they lose unless they score anyway.
With that being said, the first team would only very strategically go for 4th downs, but I doubt they go into a new set of downs with a 4 a down mentality, where as the second team is thinking this way about every set of downs. They are all 4 down territory. That’s the advantage others are speaking of.
As an example, first team has the ball on their own 30 and it’s 4th and 10. I highly doubt they go for it, where as the second team has no choice. They ARE going for it. But let’s roll this scenario back to 3rd down. Let’s say the first team is at their own 30 and it’s 3rd and 10. That team is looking to gain 10+ yards on the play, where as the second team in the same down, distance, and yardage situation, is at a minimum looking to make the yardage for a first shorter for the 4th down play, not necessarily going for the first on one play.
17 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:
Or it is an old school defensive struggle and you kick off and pin them deep and try to get field position and kick a FG to win on the second possession.
I agree there are a lot of things that can go into the decision and having the ball third is a big advantage, but only if it goes to 3 possessions. If you are in the second position - you have opportunities to control whether there is a 3rd possession.
I think it opens up a lot of options and I can not wait to see what analytics come from this.
I agree, if does open up a lot of options and I’m happy the NFL made this decision. Honestly, it took too long, but this is what OT should have been from the beginning. Honestly, I like this version better than the version the Bills proposed, which was just to play OT out (whatever the time limit is for OT). This way, there is different strategies that can be valid either way, and over time, it will be cool to see which trends develop. The only sad part is, we have to wait until the playoffs and then an OT in the playoffs.
-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:
I have a feeling this OT rule is going to bring about a whole bunch of aggressiveness and interesting decisions. Hopefully it works it’s way down into the regular season, because I feel like the fact that the board can’t agree 100% let alone 80% on what to do, some teams are going to play around with it and make it entertaining.
And go for XP or for 2pt? If we are going to take the ball first, there would be no point unless we go for 2 and put up 8 points. Otherwise there is no guarantee Allen gets that 3rd possession advantage.
It is too bad we won’t get to see this in action very often. But, I do like the aspect of having draws in the regular season. Honestly, part of me wishes the NFL would get rid of OT for the regular season. If a draw is a possibility, why have OT and risk injury? I feel like if there is going to be an OT, then there also needs to be a winner.
-
6 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:
I agree, but I think it applies to a huge % of teams - not just the Bills. Most teams want to control their own destiny and most teams feel they control things when they have the ball.
Therefore to me if I want to control my destiny - I want the ball second with everything on the line and I know exactly what I need to do to win this game. Even if I am a defensive minded guy - I want the opportunity to stop them and know a FG wins.
I want the pressure and the knowledge every time.
See, I disagree here. When considering this question in the general aspect, it can’t be properly answered without one knowing how the game is going. Consider a defense struggle of a game, a field position, old school kind of game. In this type of game, having a 3rd possession and sudden death is an advantage. Especially if the first possession is used to pin the second team deep in their own territory.
The point is, the correct decision will vary from team to team and more importantly, from game to game. I’m some ways, saying that, “we should always take the ball second or defer” is like saying, “we should always go for it on 4th and 1 or less”. Tough decisions/strategies in football are generally situation/game dependent, and I feel that the decision to either receive or defer in OT is the same.
-
3 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:
But it’s not an advantage if the other team scores a TD and elects to go for 2 to beat you. If you have the ball first, I think most teams are going to go for 2 full knowing that the responding team can have 4 downs the whole drive and score a 2 point to beat you so you don’t get that 3rd possession advantage.
Agree, which is why I think it’s a case by case scenario. If I’m playing KC, I’m deferring. I’m likely deferring anyways because you get the extra down, and you get to see if the opponent goes for the XP or 2point, so you know 100% what you need to win.
Your point is in regard to a very specific situation. What I’m saying is, a 3rd possession in sudden death is an advantage. There is no way to argue that it isn’t. A 3rd possession can come about in a few different ways, the how isn’t important, the fact that’s it’s possible is the important part.
I also think your wrong about the first team going for two when scoring a td. I certainly can see it happening, but it would be the exception and not the rule. Only elite offenses or teams with elite qb’s would be so brazen as to go for two on the first possession td.
I’d feel pretty good about the Bills having to stop a td/2pt for the win in just about every situation. Even that ***** Kansas playoff game, I’d be ok with a one play 2pt stop for our defense. I feel like, this is the way the vast majority of NFL coaches would view it as well. But only time will tell.
-
4 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:
This is 100% true if you assume the game goes to sudden death. The problem is I think most teams would avoid sudden death.
The only times I see sudden death happening is:
1) 1st team doesn’t score and the second team doesn’t score either - rare, but could happen with 2 defensive teams or weather.
2) 1st team kicks a FG and the second team is stuck in a 4th and long and has to kick the FG. (I believe many teams will go for it on 4th and short to try and win outright).
3) 1st team scores a TD and a 2 pt conversion - then the best the other team can do is tie.
I think in playoff football - a third possession would be rare, but then you are right and getting the ball 3rd would be huge. For me - I want the ball 2nd with all of the data to determine what I need to win and I’ll go from there.
I could be wrong, but I believe your answering this question as a Bills fan, knowing we have Allen. Because we have Allen I agree with what your saying. My overall point was in regards to playoff OT in general and not necessarily our team and Allen.
It really comes down to the type of game/game flow and team composition. Meaning, there isn’t one right answer for all situations/playoff OT’s.
-
7 minutes ago, SWATeam said:
The only likely scenario where it goes to sudden death is if the first team kicks a FG and the other team is in a 4th and long situation and matches.
If the first team scores a TD, the second team- if they score- will certainly attempt the 2 vs. giving the ball back to the other team in a sudden death situation.
Knowledge is power and deferring is the obvious choice, outside of a weird weather situation where the wind direction is more important.
You just made a point why there is an advantage to take the ball first. Having the ball first in a sudden death situation (regardless of how it got there) IS an advantage.
There isn’t a right answer to this question. It depends entirely on the team composition, and the flow of the game. Consider a defensive struggle, with both teams having a hard time moving the ball. In that situation, having the bs first in a sudden death situation can make sense. Another factor in this specific scenario (defensive type game), is the first team with the ball could pin the second team near their own end zone. Setting the first team up with a short field in a sudden death situation.
The point is, every game is it’s own game, and the right answer depends game to game, team to team. With our current team and Allen, I think I’d prefer having the ball second, only because I’d trust Allen to get the td and the 2 pt, especially being able to use 4 downs to move down the field/get the td.
-
8 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said:
I think with the analytics that adjust win percentage based on individual plays - 70-80% of coaches or more will be going for 2 as the 2nd team - knowing that both teams just scored on their drives and the other team can win with just a FG.
We already see teams near the end of games go for two rather than 1 to win outright rather than tie and go to OT.
We also see teams like the Bills go for 4th down TDs rather than tie the game with a FG.
Analytics would drive coaches in the 2nd spot to go for the win and try to win with your offense in a 1 play scenario.
The real question is what does the 1st team do if they score? How many have the guts to go for 2 to ensure they have life and how many just settle for the XP.
Your question at the end is a good one, but I’m sure 90%+ go for xp when scoring a td as the first team. Because at that point, your defending the field from a td, and then a 2pt play should they get the td. Lots of opportunities for the defense there, the team would have to have zero confidence in their D, or the other teams qb just playing at an unstoppable level (which is why I said 90%, it could happen, we saw Allen and Mahomes do just that).
As far as the second team, I agree 100%. Going for two would make sense in many cases, especially considering both teams just scored td’s on their first OT possession. When having a qb like Allen, it makes even more sense to go for 2 as the second team. Allen is so deadly in the redzone.
-
9 minutes ago, NewEra said:
And hoping their d can prevent a FG….after they alrsady scored a TD in OT? No thanks.
Exactly. It depends on the team composition, but with Allen, going for two makes sense.
-
48 minutes ago, SWATeam said:
There's very little benefit in taking the ball. If you defer you know exactly what you need to win.
By taking the ball, your setting the team up to have the ball first should OT move to sudden death.
To be honest, there isn’t a one size fits all answer to this question, and both sides have merit. Having the ball second, and being able to use 4 downs is a nice advantage. However, getting the ball first in sudden death is also a nice advantage.
The nice thing about going second is having the ability to go for two and avoid sudden death. I don’t think it would be common for the first team with the ball to go for two, so the second team has a shot to either win it or lose it on a 2pt play. I’d take that with Allen all day any day.
-
1
-
-
11 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:
I want to make this team multidimensional and dangerous. I don’t want to take away our fastball by feeding Breece more. I want to provide another outlet that makes teams afraid. It’s called strategic attacks. Having a player like Breece Hall makes Allen infinitely more dangerous. While yes, it’s true we still need to upgrade our Oline and grab another CB, but it’s imperative we keep our offense well oiled and dangerous. A RB like Hall will keep teams from playing 2 high all the time, otherwise we will just eat up clock and nimble off yards and teams will be slowly anaconda constricted. We need this extra piece.I’m warming up to Hall in the first for the reasons you said. It makes sense with the idea of making a super bowl push this year. It’s not common to see 6’+ rbs with 4.3 speed anymore, and Hall is a good wr weapon too.
If Hall is anything close to a Taylor or Henry (who isn’t much of a wr) at rb, our offense would be nearly unstoppable, I’m sure we’d see another no punt game or two.
10 hours ago, Solomon Grundy said:I’d take Hall, then come back and get Metchie/Pickens/Pierce at 57. CB and OL afterwards
I really like Pickens and hope that somehow/someway we land him.
-
2
-
-
18 minutes ago, McBean said:
We’re not the best team because of our HC.
If it was someone different, probably yeah but McClappy Isn’t taking us to where we wanna go.
Hope I’m wrong.
McDermott and Beane embrace a growth mindset, and so far both have shown that growth. I don’t see any reason to believe McDermott won’t learn and grow from what happened in the playoffs. For instance, consider Andy Reid (one of McDermotts mentors), he struggled in the post season/Super Bowl early on with the Eagles. There was narratives that he couldn’t win it all.
How many coaches do you think could have turned us into a playoff team in the 2017 season? Especially when everyone thought we were talking. McDermott might not be the best coach in the game yet, but he is certainly better than most, and it’s no given that a new coach would be better.
Is the 13 seconds your only reason for not having faith in McDermott? Or do you have other reasons? Who would you want as the coach, a realistic option?
-
1
-
-
29 minutes ago, boater said:
Yeah. But our secondary is officially 2nd rate. Process that.
Dane and Levi held the fort well the last half of last season, now add Von and either a vet/rookie cb. I think they can hold the fort until Tre is back. Plus, Allen is going to be even better this year, no reason to think he won’t be. He has shown growth from the start of each season to the end, and more growth in between seasons. I’m not saying we will have playoff Allen every game, but I believe we are in for a real treat with Allen this year.
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, NoSaint said:
A safety would be a great big nickel/big dime player and not a healthy scratchCould be a bit nickel. But Taron Johnson has done so well with tackling he’s kinda reduced the need for a big nickel.
McDermott takes it slow with rookies, and a later rounder safery isn’t likely to have a big role early. More like a situational use that could potential grow as the season progresses.
33 minutes ago, Utah John said:The Bills aren't in a BPA position this year. They have a serious hole to fill at CB. That's got to be where they put their money.
I don’t think Beane is done. I’m sure he has floated offers to multiple vet cb’s and the cb’s are looking to see if they can find a better offer elsewhere, with us being a fall back. Either way, I imagine before the draft Beane brings in a cb who could realistically starts across from Dane to open the season.
-
1
-
-
10 minutes ago, 947 said:
I would love a CB in the 1st & Pickens in the 2nd. That'd be our best case scenario, better than Dotson in the 1st & praying for a CB next time around.
Would probably have to move up for Pickens, but I’d love him with a first round cb
-
7 hours ago, freddyjj said:
Why trade ahead of those two teams, neither of whom would take a QB? Even Jax at top of Rd 2 doesn't need a QB.
Granted, getting a QB low in Rd 1 assures 5th year option.
I mean to say wr, but totally mistyped that.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
To all those saying the Bills need a corner, I 100% agree. But McDuffie and McCreary with their alligator arms are reaches and questionable fits for a zone scheme. While I think Kyler Gordon is a back half of round 1 talent the consensus seems to disagree.
So what do the Bills do if the top 3 corners are off the board by #25? Trade up to get one? Trade back to take one of the second tier guys where value fits better? Possibly. Brandon Beane says he is strict BPA. If that is true I very much doubt a corner ends up being that at #25 or #57.
I think a corner is a major need and indeed that is the position I ultimately think the Bills end up taking in the 1st. But to do so either they reach or they move around the board.
Maybe someone will want to trade up with us to jump Chiefs and Packers to select a qb?
I also really like Gordon, and would love to see him with us.
-
On 3/6/2022 at 10:19 AM, BarleyNY said:
Sorry. Missed that. Good catch. Still seems nebulous though - “could be”. It’s often difficult to get hard numbers regarding stadium financing. I’m just trying to work through it. No word on who eats cost overruns either.
I’n this day and age, cost overruns are almost a guarantee too. I work in large construction infrastructure business (west coast), but we can’t seem to get a project to cost it’s original projection. Hopefully it’s easier for a large stadium, with less extra costs.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, StHustle said:
So I am part owner of a sports marketing company that puts together events featuring top athletes. We are based in Philly but do events all over. We did the "Fan Conference" events a few years back in Buffalo (had guys like Josh, Dawkins, Hyde, Poyer, Lorax and Edmunds come out) and looking to do more Bills player events (as the one owner from Buffalo the weights on my shoulders) so I am looking at doing something in August when all the guys are in town. I won't release the name/theme of the event yet but it'll be held annually and give fans a chance to see and interact with some of the players before the season. My question to you all is; If you were at an event where there's around 20 Bills players (many of the top guys) and a few thousand fans, what sort of activities would make this a fun, exciting & interactive (but not too interactive, lol) event that would have you and other fans looking forward to the next annual?
Compensation: Anyone who gives ideas that aren't already on the table, are FIRST to give them in this thread (ideas that improve upon other ides count!), will get free LIFETIME tickets to the event!
I appreciate all those who decide to contribute. Thanks in advance.
I’ll note a few ideas that come to mind. But first (even though I’m about to answer). What’s the setting? Will fans be walking around and hop in line to do said event and the players are stationed (rotating?) at different events? I’m kinda curious what the intended format is, or if it’s completely open to ideas?
Ideas below:
-One of the Bills embeds showed a tug o war contest. Perhaps you could have players vs fans. Or have fans and players mixed for each of the sides. Maybe even with a Bills themed rope or something like that.
-(really random): have like a foam table (made of foam but looks like the classic fold up style) that can stand on its own, but also be used to jump on the table. Put the foam table on top of a gymnastics mat so the fall is soft. To more directly involve the players, perhaps have the players throw people (not crazy throw) onto the table ala the Josh Allen fan table throw.
- a pretty simple idea that I’m sure others will mention is a throwing type of competition. Perhaps involving either fans throwing to players, or players to fans.
- Or even just fans attempting to throw into a net with certain spots being worth points and the goal is to get a “first down” or 10 points on 3 attempts. Could have some 4th down option where you step back a certain distance based on how many points you have left. So like 4 points to go you step back 4 of whatever distance is chosen (like 4 feet, inches, etc).
Overall there could be some digital app (or just a card with stamps, or tickets) that tracks completion of the events, with some sort of “prize” for those who complete all of the events (maybe the prize is to be entered into a raffle).
I’d be happy to elaborate and I’ll attempt to brainstorm some more ideas.
Thanks for engaging the community, such a cool idea to crowd source something like this. Good luck with it all!
-
25 minutes ago, Turbo44 said:
I can't believe people are getting upset over possibly losing Bates. He's a nice player but really JAG
It creates a hole and there are not many good vet options out there. Additionally, there is no guarantees with a rookie.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:
I cant buy into any mock draft that has us waiting until the 3rd round for a CB, its by FAR our biggest hole right now. So unless we sign a vet before the draft, I have no doubt CB is coming round 1 or 2
I can’t imagine we don’t bring a vet in before the draft though. That wouldn’t be like Beane to leave such a gaping hole.
-
1
-
What would you do with the new OT rule? Defer or take the ball?
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
True, I missed the most important word of your previous post. Your point about team 1 not being able to win with their first possession is true, and I do think the trend will be for teams to defer (at-least at the start). However, there is certainly merit to taking the ball first and having the option for a 3rd possession.
For instance, with Allen I’d feel comfortable with him driving down and scoring a td on the first possession. Namely, because Allen can convert even 3rd and longs with relative ease (at least compared to just about everyone else besides Mahomes), and I’d feel really good about Allen getting us into fg distance on a 3rd drive. Also, I trust our defense to hold in a 2pt attempt, at least, enough to take the chance.
Question for you. If we got the ball first, do you automatically go for 2 every time (playoff OT)? Situation dependent? I do trust Allen going for 2, but I’d still go for the xp, unless our defense couldn’t stop anything (like our last game).