A Basic question

[Hplarrm]

The talent we have at RB appears to be awesome (Jackson- a real find as like Marv a Coe college guy who whatever people say about him subjectively, objectively he produced great all purpose yards in a record setting way as a Bill last year, Spiller simply was by many objective views hands down the most rexciting RB differencemaker in the draft last year, and Lynch though a total idiot in off field behavior is a youngster who whether folks like it or not deserved the pro bowl nod he earned).

 

However, not only is this logjam of talent weird as the Gailey past activity (in part because his teams had no backup) has been to run one RB all the time.

 

Even stranger about having this logjam of talent of RB is that many other skill positions (a bunch of potential #2s at QB, an OL which is disrupted to say the best, and a no player who has demonstrated in game production in the NFL the yards, catches, TDs to be a #2 WR.

 

The basic question is what O scheme can the Bills employ to get even a requisite amount of consistent touches for these 3 men who arguably should be relied upon to play with consistent touch opportunities.

 

The only way I can see this happening are pretty weird (but then Gailey has forgotten more than most of us have learned about effectively running an NFL O.

 

My favorite unlikely candidates are:

 

1. We run a 2 RB set with Jackson and Lynch as our two RBs as our basic set.

 

A. This has the practical advantage of both players logging PT such that both can be utilized and neither should be that upset. Like it or not one of these players will be relied upon by the actual play calls, but this will be determined by who is producing and the other RB should not feel overlooked if the other RB is simply producing.

 

B. It appears that Jackson/Lynch have a good personal relationship so it may work well for them to share this role as long as the actual play calls are dictated by the actual production.

 

C. With McIntyre as our only FB on the roster and Lynch showing good beast mode chops the 2 RB set-up as a base O makes some sense even though it is odd.

 

D. The match-up problems this creates for the opposing DC are huge as Jackson has demonstrated he is both a functional runner and receiver and Lynch has demonstrated that at his best (which we did not see at all last year) he is a pro bowl quality runner who came with good pass catching chops from college (though Jauron never found an OC to make use of the collegiate talent he showed.

 

Yet, as neat as this would be, it still leaves a significant problem in that the Bills spent a top 10 choice on Spiller. Spiller shows signs that the views of most pundits that the is one of the most exciting players in the draft on O and certainly at RB. However,

 

A. His stature and past play seem to mitigate against him being relied upon as the workhorse back.

 

B. Still since he is a threat to go to the house on every play having him out there on every play seems like the way to go.

 

The solution which I see for this problem would be to try to plug Spiller in a wideout whenever one could do it.

 

This configuration allows all three players to be on the field virtually every play and the match-up problems (with the raw speed of Evans and Spiller on the wings almost force the opposing D into the nickel or dime every play which then allows the RBs to run wild.

 

We have no (I mean zero, nada, none) WR who had demonstrated with production in the NFL that they can play the #2 WR role.

 

True. Johnson, Hardy, Parrish and even rookie Easley are all credible candidates to one day own this role. However none of them (I mean zero, nada, none) has ever produced as a #2 WR in the NFL before. Even worse, subjectively the best candidate Johnson of the 4 actually regressed statistically across the board last year rather than building on what seemed like good first year subjective hype.

 

All in all the thing that disappoints me most about the failure to sign Spiller is that if the unorthodox move of using him as our #2 WR were to work getting him as many reps in closed practices and having him go in motion wide as much as possible from the RB position in practice would be incredibly useful.

 

We simply are not doing this with him unsigned.

 

Particularly given this contractual problem I am giving up on my dream of us finding a way to get all three on the field at the same time (as unorthodox as Spiller at #2 WR would be other alternatives that employ all 3 like the wishbone are even weirder).

 

My basic question is how do folks see us getting all three players the requisite number of needed touches if the plan is not to use Spiller as much as possible (even if done it will not be shown this way initially if ever on the depth chart). It is easy for folks to simply claim it cannot be done, what I would love to see from us fans are ideas about how to do it.

[Green Lightning]

My basic question is how do folks see us getting all three players the requisite number of needed touches if the plan is not to use Spiller as much as possible (even if done it will not be shown this way initially if ever on the depth chart). It is easy for folks to simply claim it cannot be done, what I would love to see from us fans are ideas about how to do it.

 

 

I don't think it all three will be on the field that often. You'll see two back sets with Spiller moving and used for the short passing game, slot recievier and some running plays. Lynch and Jackson will split the heavy running load. They can use all three as a change-up or wildcat formation to keep defenses on their toes. But as you pointed out, Chan has forgotten more then most of us will ever learn about such things. I'm just excited to see what he does.

[DDD]

I don't think it all three will be on the field that often. You'll see two back sets with Spiller moving and used for the short passing game, slot recievier and some running plays. Lynch and Jackson will split the heavy running load. They can use all three as a change-up or wildcat formation to keep defenses on their toes. But as you pointed out, Chan has forgotten more then most of us will ever learn about such things. I'm just excited to see what he does.

 

Agreed. I also expect Spiller to be involved with returns as well.

[DDD]

The talent we have at RB appears to be awesome (Jackson- a real find as like Marv a Coe college guy who whatever people say about him subjectively, objectively he produced great all purpose yards in a record setting way as a Bill last year, Spiller simply was by many objective views hands down the most rexciting RB differencemaker in the draft last year, and Lynch though a total idiot in off field behavior is a youngster who whether folks like it or not deserved the pro bowl nod he earned).

 

However, not only is this logjam of talent weird as the Gailey past activity (in part because his teams had no backup) has been to run one RB all the time.

 

Even stranger about having this logjam of talent of RB is that many other skill positions (a bunch of potential #2s at QB, an OL which is disrupted to say the best, and a no player who has demonstrated in game production in the NFL the yards, catches, TDs to be a #2 WR.

 

The basic question is what O scheme can the Bills employ to get even a requisite amount of consistent touches for these 3 men who arguably should be relied upon to play with consistent touch opportunities.

 

The only way I can see this happening are pretty weird (but then Gailey has forgotten more than most of us have learned about effectively running an NFL O.

 

My favorite unlikely candidates are:

 

1. We run a 2 RB set with Jackson and Lynch as our two RBs as our basic set.

 

A. This has the practical advantage of both players logging PT such that both can be utilized and neither should be that upset. Like it or not one of these players will be relied upon by the actual play calls, but this will be determined by who is producing and the other RB should not feel overlooked if the other RB is simply producing.

 

B. It appears that Jackson/Lynch have a good personal relationship so it may work well for them to share this role as long as the actual play calls are dictated by the actual production.

 

C. With McIntyre as our only FB on the roster and Lynch showing good beast mode chops the 2 RB set-up as a base O makes some sense even though it is odd.

 

D. The match-up problems this creates for the opposing DC are huge as Jackson has demonstrated he is both a functional runner and receiver and Lynch has demonstrated that at his best (which we did not see at all last year) he is a pro bowl quality runner who came with good pass catching chops from college (though Jauron never found an OC to make use of the collegiate talent he showed.

 

Yet, as neat as this would be, it still leaves a significant problem in that the Bills spent a top 10 choice on Spiller. Spiller shows signs that the views of most pundits that the is one of the most exciting players in the draft on O and certainly at RB. However,

 

A. His stature and past play seem to mitigate against him being relied upon as the workhorse back.

 

B. Still since he is a threat to go to the house on every play having him out there on every play seems like the way to go.

 

The solution which I see for this problem would be to try to plug Spiller in a wideout whenever one could do it.

 

This configuration allows all three players to be on the field virtually every play and the match-up problems (with the raw speed of Evans and Spiller on the wings almost force the opposing D into the nickel or dime every play which then allows the RBs to run wild.

 

We have no (I mean zero, nada, none) WR who had demonstrated with production in the NFL that they can play the #2 WR role.

 

True. Johnson, Hardy, Parrish and even rookie Easley are all credible candidates to one day own this role. However none of them (I mean zero, nada, none) has ever produced as a #2 WR in the NFL before. Even worse, subjectively the best candidate Johnson of the 4 actually regressed statistically across the board last year rather than building on what seemed like good first year subjective hype.

 

All in all the thing that disappoints me most about the failure to sign Spiller is that if the unorthodox move of using him as our #2 WR were to work getting him as many reps in closed practices and having him go in motion wide as much as possible from the RB position in practice would be incredibly useful.

 

We simply are not doing this with him unsigned.

 

Particularly given this contractual problem I am giving up on my dream of us finding a way to get all three on the field at the same time (as unorthodox as Spiller at #2 WR would be other alternatives that employ all 3 like the wishbone are even weirder).

 

My basic question is how do folks see us getting all three players the requisite number of needed touches if the plan is not to use Spiller as much as possible (even if done it will not be shown this way initially if ever on the depth chart). It is easy for folks to simply claim it cannot be done, what I would love to see from us fans are ideas about how to do it.

 

 

Nice assessments of the RB's. Lynch, off-field issues aside, is a good football player. Jackson is also a good player but I think Lynch is a better back to pound the ball with. Someone likely will get injuredand with Gailey's dedication to run the ball, a crowded backfield is essential.

[TheLynchTrain]

We'll see how they use the three. I'm normally optimistic, but we've all seen our coaches in the past underutilize their strongest assets, regardless of the position.

 

As always with a new coach, its wait and see.

[Buffalonian-at-Heart]

We have no (I mean zero, nada, none) WR who had demonstrated with production in the NFL that they can play the #2 WR role.

 

I completely (disagree with this assessment, I think Lee Evans has shown he's a more than adequate #2 NFL receiver. The problem with this team is we don't have a #1 receiver. I feel we may have some options currently on our team that will solve that problem. Furthermore if one of these receivers don't emerge and help move the chains, you can forget about worrying about 3 running backs getting enough touches. I'm going to open my parenthesis early, and I'm going to leave them open for a loooonnnng time.)

[Hossage]

We dont run the wing T, but if we did, we would have a versatile left half in freddy, a fullback in Lynch, and a right half in spiller.

[evilbuffalobob]

I don't see any reason for two FB's hogging up roster spots.

[Green Lightning]

I don't see any reason for two FB's hogging up roster spots.

 

 

Excellent point. Seems hard to justify.

[Hplarrm]

I completely (disagree with this assessment, I think Lee Evans has shown he's a more than adequate #2 NFL receiver. The problem with this team is we don't have a #1 receiver. I feel we may have some options currently on our team that will solve that problem. Furthermore if one of these receivers don't emerge and help move the chains, you can forget about worrying about 3 running backs getting enough touches. I'm going to open my parenthesis early, and I'm going to leave them open for a loooonnnng time.)

If this is true we are in big trouble because since I do not think we even have a player who has produced any tangible results that show he is a #2 quality WR, I have no idea which player you are saying are options to become the #1.

 

If so what do you see as the objectives indicators of these players becoming a #1? I guess there are lots of fact free subjective opinions that this player or that player runs good routes like a seasoned pro. However, I tend to discount these fact free opinions when there are no objective data to support them.

 

For example I liked the chatter which was given after last season about the work of rookie Steve Johnson at WR, but these subjective opinions hold much less weight to me than the simple fact that he regressed statistically last season in yardage, receptions, and playing time. Perhaps one might want to make the case that this regression happened because the Bills were gonna play Evans and TO regardless so his numbers went down.

 

Fine.

 

However, even if you accept this as a given, Johnson saw his production go down when clearly Parrish being in the doghouse gave him a shot at some serious #3 time if he was that good. The best players are simply uncoverable (particularly against the left over talent they faced after the opponent sent their best CBs after Evans/TO). Last years seemed like a perfect time for even a back-up like Johnson to beat out Parrish and lay the ground work for demonstrating he was a #2 talent and he did not even do this much less present a reasonable option for #1.

 

Hardy also remains a disappointment that we hope can step up to be a reliable player (solid back-up would be a good step up for him so starter I am not worried about yet. Roscoe strikes me as a potentially solid #3 slot guy and maybe you want to make the tough case for him as a #2 but him being an option for #1 seems unlikely to say the least.

 

I would not imagine you see rookie Easley as an option for #1 so I am just not sure who you are even hinting at.

[ganesh]

Nice assessments of the RB's. Lynch, off-field issues aside, is a good football player. Jackson is also a good player but I think Lynch is a better back to pound the ball with. Someone likely will get injuredand with Gailey's dedication to run the ball, a crowded backfield is essential.

 

Also, Lynch can score in the Redzone. Jackson - His # of TDs last season speaks for itself.

[BillsPhan]

...The talent we have at RB appears to be awesome...My basic question is how do folks see us getting all three players the requisite number of needed touches...

 

Great question. I don't think Gailey would have chosen to keep both Jackson and Lynch if completely his choice. Buddy Nix is nothing if not a smarter football man then Russ Brandon was. Nix really had no choice other then to tell Chan he was stuck with Lynch for at least this next season, since his trade value was zero due to Marshawns' off field stupidity.

 

Given that fact, Chan is doing exactly what he would have been doing if Lynch was gone. He is giving all of his RB's the reps they deserve based on performance, and he will run his offense the way he thinks will work best, without caring in the least about their "feelings", or our perception of what we think the "requisite number of touches they need" is. Before they drafted Spiller when their turn came up back in April, you know Gailey had a plan for exactly how he would use him this season. Sure Nix told us that Spiller was "the highest rated player on their board" when their turn came up. But Gailey had to have a plan for him, or Nix would not have had him rated that highly.

 

So Spiller won't be the starting RB, in my humble opinion, but he will be used all over the place on offense and on kick returns. If both Jackson and Lynch stay healthy all season, one will be Chan's "workhorse" and the other will be the change of pace / back up, getting less reps. If they both stay healthy, Gailey could have the luxury of switching their roles up as starters from game to game, keeping them both extremely motivated all year. But based on, as you put it, Gailey's past success with using one starting RB the most during the game, I just don't see him changing towards 2 back sets and equal reps during the game.