I worry about this team

[Defend Greece]

Did you think this was a vikings forum?

[ColdBlueNorth]

My only worry is the lack of a pass rush, but I will reserve judgement to see how things go this week with Troup in the rotation and a team that is not the Patriots with Brady's quick release nor Oaklands rushing attack that shredded the Jets.

 

If it is the defensive feeding frenzy I expect I will be less concerned. Merriman is still hurt, anyone with eyes can see that. I wonder if he can stay healthy any more - that would be a shame, he is an amazing player when not battling injuries.

[macaroni]

Because you don't watch every other NFL under a microscope like you do the Bills, you don't notice that every NFL team has flaws, even the mighty Packers. The object of the game is to gameplan so that your flaws do not become a liability, while you exploit the other guys flaws. So far so good.

 

Also, this isn't like college where teams play cupcakes. Every NFL team can beat you, so any win in the NFL means something.

 

PTR

 

 

Dang!!!! It IS hard to win in the NFL

[artmalibu]

The OP has some ligit concerns but, I believe that when a team shows that they can over come a big points deficit they can win the tough games. Last year we lost 4 or 5 close games that could have been won, this year we win most of those games. Its nice starting 3 and 0 with 3 AFC wins, even if we hit a rough patch playoff are still a possibility.

[Fan in San Diego]

Fan, I understand where you get this perception. The announcers are "loud and proud" about it.

 

Looking under the hood suggests it is mistaken.

I would say the whole offense is coming out tight and making mistakes at the beginning of the game, and this has to stop.

 

I think we can all agree the Bills and Fitz came out hot against the Chiefs.

Let's break down the first 3 Bills offensive series against Oak, and NE, shall we?

 

Number of run plays: 14 (counting pitchback to Smith as a run)

Number of pass plays: 23

Number of significant penalties (cut block, block in the back, etc): 4

That's pretty pass-happy. 62% pass.

 

Successful run plays (>2 yds): 7

Unsuccessful run plays (<2 yds): 7

Successful pass plays (>2 yds): 15

Unsuccessful pass plays: 8

----Unsuccessful pass plays that went off the receivers hands or were dropped: 3

----Unsuccessful pass plays that were poor throws or Ints: 5

 

If the ball hits the receiver's hands and is dropped or goes through them, there's not too much Fitz can improve.

 

Of the 3 interceptions, the Int on the 3rd drive in Oakland was a poor throw and you could tell Fitzy wanted that one back.

Against NE, I'm racking it up to Fitz but the first Int went THROUGH Donald Jones hands. The second was essentially a short punt taking a shot at 4th and long.

 

Bottom line: when we are running the ball early, it's only successful 50% of the time.

When we're passing early, it's successful 65% of the time. An additional 13% hit the receiver's hands or went through them (not counting the Int that went through DJ's hands)

 

Here's what Hopeful sees:

1) We are consistently deferring and apparently will continue to defer. This really puts it on our D. If they don't get a stop (eg, NE), we start out 7 down, which may not be good for our young offense. Maybe they feel more pressure, and tighten up. The early success we had, against the Chiefs, came when we got the ball right away after a fumble. Should that "make you go hmmmmm"?

2) The play calling on the first 3 series has been pass-happy. 62%.

3) The real silent killer for the Bills has been penalties. Counting penalty on return, 4 big ones on 6 early drives. 3 have negated successful plays.

4) 50% success rate on early runs is NOT good. We need to improve this. Combined with our play percentage, teams are going to start keying.

 

I would say Fitz has been playing fairly well out the gate. 78% catchable throws is not shabby at all. He threw one BONEHEAD Int against Oak where you could tell he wanted it back right away. The other "real" Int went THROUGH DJ's hands and arguably could have been caught. Fitz is always going to make these kind of throws, it's who he is. The Int on 4th and long was deliberate risk-taking, essentially a "worst case = short punt" kind of throw.

 

Hopeful's keys to change:

1) Quit with the penalties. "Don't be dumb, don't be dirty." That change alone would foster more early success. 4 out of 6 early drives? "C'mon man."

2) Re-examine the play calling early. We need to succeed more often when we do call a run. Are we calling the right run plays? Too many pass plays?

3) Re-examine the "defer" strategy.

 

Points 2) and 3) are really on our coaches.

 

Point 1) is really a symptom that ALL our players, not just Fitz, need to come out focused on business There has been plenty of poor play to spread around blame.

 

Good analysis. Thanks for posting this.

 

My only worry is the lack of a pass rush, but I will reserve judgement to see how things go this week with Troup in the rotation and a team that is not the Patriots with Brady's quick release nor Oaklands rushing attack that shredded the Jets.

 

If it is the defensive feeding frenzy I expect I will be less concerned. Merriman is still hurt, anyone with eyes can see that. I wonder if he can stay healthy any more - that would be a shame, he is an amazing player when not battling injuries.

 

Listen to the Buddy Nix interview from San Diego. He talks about Merriman.

[Clippers of Nfl]

Our defense didn't stop KC's offense? They didn't intercept Brady* 4 times? You're worried because the Bills D didn't shut down the Cheatriette* offense that put up over 1000 yards in their* first 2 games?

 

 

The Bills are fine. They have no weaknesses. You need to worry less, and enjoy more.

 

 

Let others worry about the Bills - like Bengals fans, maybe...

 

 

Buffalo Bills 72

Cincinnati BungHoles - 0

 

GO BILLSSS!!!!

 

"I expect to be undefeated." - Chan Gailey

 

 

19 and 0 baby!!!!!

this came at a right time. having a bad morning.

 

super funny. kind of caught me off guard. thanks Senator

[benderbender]

I can wear my jersey in public without getting laughed at. Life is good.

[SoFFacet]

Let's break down the first 3 Bills offensive series against Oak, and NE, shall we?

 

Number of run plays: 14 (counting pitchback to Smith as a run)

Number of pass plays: 23

Number of significant penalties (cut block, block in the back, etc): 4

That's pretty pass-happy. 62% pass.

 

Successful run plays (>2 yds): 7

Unsuccessful run plays (<2 yds): 7

Successful pass plays (>2 yds): 15

Unsuccessful pass plays: 8

----Unsuccessful pass plays that went off the receivers hands or were dropped: 3

----Unsuccessful pass plays that were poor throws or Ints: 5

 

If the ball hits the receiver's hands and is dropped or goes through them, there's not too much Fitz can improve.

 

Of the 3 interceptions, the Int on the 3rd drive in Oakland was a poor throw and you could tell Fitzy wanted that one back.

Against NE, I'm racking it up to Fitz but the first Int went THROUGH Donald Jones hands. The second was essentially a short punt taking a shot at 4th and long.

 

Bottom line: when we are running the ball early, it's only successful 50% of the time.

When we're passing early, it's successful 65% of the time. An additional 13% hit the receiver's hands or went through them (not counting the Int that went through DJ's hands)

 

Here's what Hopeful sees:

1) We are consistently deferring and apparently will continue to defer. This really puts it on our D. If they don't get a stop (eg, NE), we start out 7 down, which may not be good for our young offense. Maybe they feel more pressure, and tighten up. The early success we had, against the Chiefs, came when we got the ball right away after a fumble. Should that "make you go hmmmmm"?

2) The play calling on the first 3 series has been pass-happy. 62%.

3) The real silent killer for the Bills has been penalties. Counting penalty on return, 4 big ones on 6 early drives. 3 have negated successful plays.

4) 50% success rate on early runs is NOT good. We need to improve this. Combined with our play percentage, teams are going to start keying.

 

I would say Fitz has been playing fairly well out the gate. 78% catchable throws is not shabby at all. He threw one BONEHEAD Int against Oak where you could tell he wanted it back right away. The other "real" Int went THROUGH DJ's hands and arguably could have been caught. Fitz is always going to make these kind of throws, it's who he is. The Int on 4th and long was deliberate risk-taking, essentially a "worst case = short punt" kind of throw.

 

Hopeful's keys to change:

1) Quit with the penalties. "Don't be dumb, don't be dirty." That change alone would foster more early success. 4 out of 6 early drives? "C'mon man."

2) Re-examine the play calling early. We need to succeed more often when we do call a run. Are we calling the right run plays? Too many pass plays?

3) Re-examine the "defer" strategy.

 

I agree that we need to take fewer penalties. They have killed several of our 1st half drives this season.

 

Regarding #2, far too few snaps have been played thus far to make that kind of past-results-based argument about which plays are likely to work better in the future. It is all within the realm of noise and coincidence right now.

 

And for #3, deferring is clearly not reason we fall behind. Against Oakland both teams punted twice before Oakland finally drove the length of the field and then intercepted Fitz. Against NE, we had what, 2 turnovers and 2 punts before finally starting to fight back? For strong teams that don't fold against an early deficit, deferring is superior for the opportunity to immediately seize momentum in the second half (see Oakland game), or create consecutive possessions on either end of halftime (both Oakland and NE games).

 

While there is still quite a bit of room for improvement (showing up for the 1st quarter would be nice), I like that Gailey is coaching his team like a strong team.

Edited October 1, 2011 by SoFFacet

[Kelly the Dog]

I think it's pretty much all been the penalties. If you take them away, we pretty much go up and down the field. If you put them into the TD drives in the second half, they are likely drive killers. Sure there are exceptions, and we have overcome some penalties on some TD drives. But they have really hurt us in the first half. We have had drops in both halves.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Good analysis. Thanks for posting this.

 

You are welcome! And thank you for the good word!

[Smears]

This Bills team seems to be more of a situational football team. They know how to play when the situation presents it self. Once they know the pace the game is going then they play well. Thats why they seem to start slow. But they cant be that way every game. It will burn them out.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

I agree that we need to take fewer penalties. They have killed several of our 1st half drives this season.

 

That would be 4 out of the first 6, in two games. 2/3.

 

Regarding #2, far too few snaps have been played thus far to make that kind of past-results-based argument about which plays are likely to work better in the future. It is all within the realm of noise and coincidence right now.

 

The starting play sequence is always a chess match - even at the beginning of the season, based on prev. seasons, preseason, and known preferences of the coach and personnel.

I'm only an egg, not a professional football analyst with the time and film to pick our play selection apart. It's appropriate to use the first few drives to try to establish certain types of plays. I just have the sense that we're taking that "testing the waters" thing a little too far and not "dressing ourselves for success" with the play calling on the first few drives. The good news is we're making adjustments, and finding things that work, then using them. I just want us to do it before we fall behind 21-0

 

And for #3, deferring is clearly not reason we fall behind. Against Oakland both teams punted twice before Oakland finally drove the length of the field and then intercepted Fitz. Against NE, we had what, 2 turnovers and 2 punts before finally starting to fight back? For strong teams that don't fold against an early deficit, deferring is superior for the opportunity to immediately seize momentum in the second half (see Oakland game), or create consecutive possessions on either end of halftime (both Oakland and NE games).

 

You're correctly quoting the usual dogma for deferring. It's a matter of fact that since New England was allowed to score on their first drive, deferring did in fact cause us to play from behind in that game. It's a matter of opinion whether it contributed to the "nerves" we seemed to show in the first few Oak drives. "Coaching like we're a strong team" sounds great. Success ultimately means our coaches recognize and coach the team we have, not the team we want to have or hope to have next year.

 

The fact is, for whatever reason, we have dug ourselves quite the hole during the last two games. It's an observation that the offensed seems to be 'playing tight' in those games, as evidenced by penalties, 50% stuffed run plays even where we ultimately ran successfully, dropped balls, etcetera. Then the fair question becomes "why?" And "what can we do about it?"

 

Would putting the O on the field immediately help them focus and settle in? Don't know. We ultimately won, so one can argue for "don't change a thing". It seems fair to ask though.

[John from Riverside]

I just dont understand why some fans are so afraid to lose......

 

Losses are going to happen....instead of fearing it enjoy the fact that the team looks like an legit NFL team right now and now an afterthought

 

Here are my thoughts

 

- Bounces have happened for us....eventually some will happen against us

 

- We have a VERY WELL BALANCED offense which is very good news......if teams try to shut down the wide formation passing then they will have to give up something in the running game and Jackson/Spiller are doing work......go ahead and do that we are not afraid of long drives

 

- The defense has shown SIGNIFICANT improvement in the running game.....it doesnt show it in the stat line but anyone can see that we are now stuff the run pretty well.

 

In my opinion I think the media is wrong when they think Buffalo peaked too early....the truth is there are still several things to be improved upon over the season.

 

Enjoy the wins....expect us to have some losses......but know that the team is finally pointed in the right direction

[Malazan]

I just dont understand why some fans are so afraid to lose......

 

A lot of people on this board would prefer it if the Bills were losing because it takes the 'risk' of losing out of it. This place is going to be a pit after the first loss. Tune in and watch DOOOOOOOOOOM at 11

[SoFFacet]

The starting play sequence is always a chess match - even at the beginning of the season, based on prev. seasons, preseason, and known preferences of the coach and personnel.

I'm only an egg, not a professional football analyst with the time and film to pick our play selection apart. It's appropriate to use the first few drives to try to establish certain types of plays. I just have the sense that we're taking that "testing the waters" thing a little too far and not "dressing ourselves for success" with the play calling on the first few drives. The good news is we're making adjustments, and finding things that work, then using them. I just want us to do it before we fall behind 21-0

 

Not sure what you're trying to get at here. I would also prefer not to spot our opponents large leads, but the fact is that errors in execution have much more to do with our early struggles than playcalling. The players even said so after both of the last two games - there were no halftime adjustments, they just went out and executed the same plan without all the errors.

 

You're correctly quoting the usual dogma for deferring. It's a matter of fact that since New England was allowed to score on their first drive, deferring did in fact cause us to play from behind in that game.

 

Thats completely incorrect. NE's offense simply outplaying our defense was a far greater contributing factor to their lead, than was the mere fact that they had the ball first. Also, since we did not score for several possessions, and New England did, we would have played from behind regardless of our coin toss decision.

 

It's a matter of opinion whether it contributed to the "nerves" we seemed to show in the first few Oak drives. "Coaching like we're a strong team" sounds great. Success ultimately means our coaches recognize and coach the team we have, not the team we want to have or hope to have next year.

 

The fact is, for whatever reason, we have dug ourselves quite the hole during the last two games. It's an observation that the offensed seems to be 'playing tight' in those games, as evidenced by penalties, 50% stuffed run plays even where we ultimately ran successfully, dropped balls, etcetera. Then the fair question becomes "why?" And "what can we do about it?"

 

Would putting the O on the field immediately help them focus and settle in? Don't know. We ultimately won, so one can argue for "don't change a thing". It seems fair to ask though.

 

Certainly, there is nothing wrong with asking. But there is simply no evidence that supports the idea that our offense would play better if it received the ball first. I would like to compete more in the first half as well, but based on the performance so far, the answer lies almost entirely in improving execution, not in changing strategy.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Not sure what you're trying to get at here.

 

Easy enough: you said "far too few snaps have been played thus far to make that kind of past-results-based argument about which plays are likely to work better in the future. It is all within the realm of noise and coincidence right now." I disagree with you. I believe most students of the football chess match would disagree with you. Hopefully the Bills coaches are doing the sort of self-scouting that will help them pick this apart. Chan referenced this in his presser, actually.

 

I would also prefer not to spot our opponents large leads, but the fact is that errors in execution have much more to do with our early struggles than playcalling. The players even said so after both of the last two games - there were no halftime adjustments, they just went out and executed the same plan without all the errors.

 

I have also heard the players say that. In an overall sense, of not substituting players or changing assignments, it's probably true. In the detailed sense of what plays are called and the details of how they are executed, I don't think it's true. Again, I'm not a professional football analyst with the time and film to pick our play selection apart and my eyes could be deceiving me. I haven't been formally scoring each play of the game - it kind of takes the pepper out of it for me.

 

Thats completely incorrect. NE's offense simply outplaying our defense was a far greater contributing factor to their lead, than was the mere fact that they had the ball first. Also, since we did not score for several possessions, and New England did, we would have played from behind regardless of our coin toss decision.

 

Dude, if you can't even ack the fact that: 1) we gave NE the ball first 2) they scored first 3) therefore they were ahead first as a direct result of having the first possession, that says something.

 

My point is it's fallacious to make that kind of reasoning. Football is a game of emotion and energy as well as logic and execution. It can never be treated as a simple "rub one thing out and see, nothing else changes" picture. Same reason it's not so clear cut to argue that Ochocinco's dropped pass had no effect on the outcome of the game (would you argue that too?).

 

Hopeful out, what I've said can be taken or left on its merits here on.

[CSBill]

Because you don't watch every other NFL under a microscope like you do the Bills, you don't notice that every NFL team has flaws, even the mighty Packers. The object of the game is to gameplan so that your flaws do not become a liability, while you exploit the other guys flaws. So far so good.

 

Also, this isn't like college where teams play cupcakes. Every NFL team can beat you, so any win in the NFL means something.

 

PTR

 

right

[SageAgainstTheMachine]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWNja7skJ2Q

[SoFFacet]

Easy enough: you said "far too few snaps have been played thus far to make that kind of past-results-based argument about which plays are likely to work better in the future. It is all within the realm of noise and coincidence right now." I disagree with you. I believe most students of the football chess match would disagree with you. Hopefully the Bills coaches are doing the sort of self-scouting that will help them pick this apart. Chan referenced this in his presser, actually.

 

 

 

I have also heard the players say that. In an overall sense, of not substituting players or changing assignments, it's probably true. In the detailed sense of what plays are called and the details of how they are executed, I don't think it's true. Again, I'm not a professional football analyst with the time and film to pick our play selection apart and my eyes could be deceiving me. I haven't been formally scoring each play of the game - it kind of takes the pepper out of it for me.

 

It is impossible to indict early playcalling when there are so many early execution errors. There is no evidence that getting the ball first would improve the early offensive execution.

 

Dude, if you can't even ack the fact that: 1) we gave NE the ball first 2) they scored first 3) therefore they were ahead first as a direct result of having the first possession, that says something.

 

My point is it's fallacious to make that kind of reasoning. Football is a game of emotion and energy as well as logic and execution. It can never be treated as a simple "rub one thing out and see, nothing else changes" picture. Same reason it's not so clear cut to argue that Ochocinco's dropped pass had no effect on the outcome of the game (would you argue that too?).

 

I don't know why you feel you need to be rude, I was just disagreeing with you. But now that you've annoyed me, my point is that it is actually your reasoning that is fallacious. NE's lead cannot be solely attributed to deferring, no matter how many times you stamp your feet and insist it can. Would you argue that getting the ball first in the second half was the reason for our comeback, or merely a slight advantage, overwhelmed in the grand scheme of things by the real reason - simply outplaying NE? Thought so.

 

NE executed in the first quarter - we didn't. They would have been ahead regardless of deferring. If you can't understand that, "that says something."

Edited October 1, 2011 by SoFFacet

[/dev/null]

I worry about alot of things. Will I have a job? Can I pay my mortgage? Nazi zombies taking over the world and trying to eat my brains.

 

But this team is low down on my list, somewhere above genetically engineered dinosaurs eating me but below an asteroid that Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck can't save humanity from