Italian Bills

Exactly: after the very first plays of the game, it was clear that Taylor was going to have a great day, so why not change the formation to waste their plan ? Would have it worked ? We don’t know, but i think that Taylor would have been contained and their OL could have been faced better. I said before that i agree that a 5-2 could have been another right solution.

Yes… i think that using Tyrel Dodson or Matakevich, the second more than the first, would have been better that Taron in this particular game. And believe me, Wenz couldn’t have had 300+ passing yards and three TDs because our secondary is too good first and second because he’s not able to throw for 300+ yards. Agree on the turns. At last, on the first instance, i didn’t mean that i’m the one the is right and the others not.. i just referred about the using the 4-3 and not the nickel when we face strong backs, the past showed this.

Exactly. That ‘s you must fortify the DL in the 4-3 or even 8 in the box and the OL with a TD almost every play and maybe sometimes two backs together to give Josh more time to throw. More slant routes and jet sweep could help also.

They are terrified about make some changes and maybe lose… terrified to be attacked from everywhere about the changes made. Without “big balls” you don’t go anywhere in this game.

I honestly don’t see where i had to indicate the correlation: i simply said that maybe i was right to think about using a 4-3 base and not the nickel in this specifically game against the Colts. I get you when you said we were without Lotulelei and Edmunds and that we had a very poor day, but leaving the Colts their main weapon, it could have helped. Exactly, this is another interesting observation.

Well, not having Edmunds could have been something to be concerned, but with a RB like Taylor to face and knowing how much we suffer physical backs, it could have been enough to switch in a 4-3 base. But i understand your point. Yes i really do, because i’m italian and living here in italy but i follow this Franchise every single year since 1989 and came in the US more than one time just to go to watch them in Orchard Park, so yes i hate that i was right because we lost 41-15 !

Well... from yesterday i still feel very bad about the massacre we suffered at home... and i still think that using the 4-3 base defense and not the nikel, the outcome could have been very different. Ok... we had four turnovers, ok we played a poor offensive game and yes, as always, we played too soft... but i'm sure that using a 4-3 base defense Taylor would not have had 183 rushing yards and four rushing TDs. Many of you agreed with me when some days ago i was suggesting about using the 4-3 in this game because of Taylor... many of you didn't, saying that the nikel is our best D and that we didn't have to change it... because it worked... i was thinking about the 4-3 because we always struggle against strong OLs with great RBs, like we did against the Titans. Sometimes better don't be stubborn and change your system to limit or nullify other Teams strenghts. Start with limit Taylor, then let see what happen with Wenz and our offense, but if you cut 183 yards to 70/80, i think the game is a totale different one. 41-15 at home is brutal... maybe the worse possible scenario, but i still believe we can regain the lead in the Division if healty and maybe............. smarter.

Play aggressive, cut the turns and we’ll be fine

Holy cow … it seems we are playing against the NFL defending champion. Well, they are not ! Are they a quality team ? Yes —- We better, no doubt. Do they have a very good RB ? Yes —- this where we pay the price every week, so no something new Are they a superbowl caliber team ? No —- we are Do they have a top 5 QB ? No —- we do, a top 3 Is their record till now so good ? No —- our is, even with that painful Jags meltdown Well… we are playing at home, full of the best fans in the NFL and a top 3 wild environment… let’s play this game like it was a playoff one. Let’s just do three things: play a very physical game on D, because sometimes we are too “clean”, find a way to give all the protection Josh need to give him time to read and throw.. and cut stupid penalties, we need to stay inside 50/60 penalty yards, not more… take care of this three aspects and i’m sure we’ll come away with a good W, not easy, but a good one, not on the wire.

And still they are 5-5….

Ehhhhte … everything is possible… a stomach ache you know…

Sunday is coming … Colts and Taylor are coming to town… Spencer Brown out … so, in a single word, how you feel about sunday ? And how many chance you give to a Bills win ? Me: anxious My chance: from 70 to 75%

Exactly, that’s why i suggested a 4-3 formation against strong running teams.

I thought the same about our OL players’s pounds compared to others D lines. I agree we are lighter and that’s another reason to use three LB’s, to support and strenght our front four against the run. This just when we face great backs like Henry, Kamara, etc. But it seem that people think i’m saying to change everything on D - I’’M NOT SAYING THIS, OK ? I was thinking about using a 4-3 in particular games against strong backs and “normal” QBs.

When i opened this thread was not to say that we have to change the way we are playing D, i’m not crazy.. i opened this thread to ask your opinion about using a 4-3 formation here and there using three LBs to rush the passer more and to be more consistent at stopping the run against teams with great backs like Henry, Kamara, Taylor, etc. And those teams don’t have great QBs that can make you pay the price to play that formation few snaps during the game. I do also agree that the nickel is the right asset.

Everything i had in my mind about this 4-3 stuff, start from the fact that i wish we could play more propositive football on D instead that conservative. I mean… i want our approach to be very aggressive, give less time to other QBs to throw, get more sacks… but of course not every single play, but sometimes yes. Mix the formation could only improve our D and worry other DCs how to answer changing their comfort zone. We have top cornerbacks and safeties that can cover the field pretty damn well man to man, so i won’t be so concerned to try the 4-3 few times. And like you guys said, against strong backs, with who we have hard times, one more LB could help a lot.

The gameplan is obviously very important to decide when to use this formation and when don’t do it. I agree with you that against strong run offense teams using three LBs could help our interior OL pretty well.

I didn’t say that. I was just thinking if sometime we could use that 4-3 formation to be more aggressive against the QB, we never used our three LBs together and having three very good ones, it could be something to use here and there, not constantly. No no… i would like to see what would happen with all our three LBs together on the field at the same time. Of course we would have to think about dropping one and be very focused on the deep side of the field.

Interesting point of you… honestly i didn’t consider TJ in my theory. This because i wish to be very aggressive on the line attacking the QB more often.. maybe also using a safety blitz sometimes.

I lately have this in my mind … using all our three LBs together to give more pressure on other QB and because our three LBs are quick enough to pass over opposite tackles. Maybe dropping Milano in the middle letting Edmunds and Klein go for the QB. Another reason because we could use a 4-3 formation is because we do have four strong defensive backs and anyway we could switch from the 4-3 to a nichel or dime formation if needed. What you think ?

The chart is very clear but not always the numbers speak for what happen on the field and this about every pro sports. Many times, for example, during the games i’m there loosing my self control because we can’t get to other QBs. 😅 It was just an example on what can happen every year in this league. Of course i don’t know what is more likely to happen hut if i have to chose, i’m for improving the OL because we have a top 3 QB.

I got your point… in fact one thing i was thinking is that we could play a 4-3 D with three LB all together, dropping one in Milano e free Edmunds and Klein to rush the passer, not on every play, but here and there during the game.

Listen: i agree with you that we have a stout D but not sure about the best one. The games we lost were against elite teams, with PIT at the first game of the season where almost everybody were here predicting an easy one… then TEN where was a great game over all and yes we lost on the last play, but we lost and TEN scored 34, while the win in KC was a statement by our side but be honest, it was’t the 2020 KC’s version. Anyway i repeat myself: our D is very very good, top 5, but to me, to be the best one, would have to have more sacks, hits or pressure on other QBs, an area we lack of a little bit.

Great D in the NFL ? Sure. The best one ? I dunno. Remember the opponents we faced till now and that we lost against PIT, KC and TEN, the only very good teams (i don’t wanna think about the Jags game where we played overall awfully and Cord was in the game). PIT has BB’s son as HC, KC was/is a mess and TEN with one only very great player by its side (Henry, because Tannehill sucks) So be quite screaming we are the best D in the entire NFL. We are pretty damn good, but best don’t know, even if the math right now say this.

My opinion ? Pay for him everything ! Jokes a part… i love the way this guy play every game.. great approach and also very good feeling for the game. i’ll keep him without hesitation.