Run or pass 1st

[bowery4]

I posted this in another thread and have been thinking about it for the last few weeks. I understand why Chan feels the way he does about the ability to pass the ball as a way to set the run. I get the philosophy and reasoning behind it but.... There were games this year where we just didn't stick with the run when it was working and I want to see THAT change. The gameplan against the team you are playing should dictate it as much as the relative stregnth of your teams players to execute it.

Especially with the dual threat we have in the backfield, I think you design your attack around all of your players (as opposed to just the QB and some receivers). I can see against NE* using the spread to build a lead and sticking to it because they run up points and don't have a strong short pass D and we do play them 2xs a year BUT all teams are not NE*. The Cinci game comes to my mind, we switched from what was working and then our D fell apart. It kind of leads to the conclusion that in the 4th you WILL be playing from behind...

 

Stick with what is working until they take it away and running is a bigger strength on this team with our RBs (and I would also say our Oline in run blocking). Chan says he wants a balanced attack but rarely shows that. In fact even on BB right now he is quoted as saying:

 

“I think you have to be balanced, but today in this league I think you may have to lean a little bit more on the pass game,” he said. “The defensive players are so much bigger and stronger and faster than they were 15 years ago and the field has remained the same size. So for the offense the field has actually shrunk because those defensive players are so much bigger, faster and stronger. So the only way to gain an advantage is to spread people out a little bit and create more creases for running lanes, throwing lanes, things like that.”

 

This past season there were 569 pass attempts for Fitzpatrick and 277 rushes for Jackson and Spiller combined. Part of the reason for that disparity was the frequency in which the Bills were behind on the scoreboard. Buffalo trailed their opponents in the third quarter in 10 of their 16 ball games often leading to more pass attempts.

 

If Buffalo is closer on the scoreboard through the course of games it’s reasonable to assume that the run-pass figures could shift slightly to 500 passes for Fitz and 345 carries for the two backs. Knowing 80 of Fitz’s completions will probably go to Jackson and Spiller as well (78 in 2011) that could be a balance Gailey can live with.

 

The key is getting Jackson and Spiller to live with them.

 

“I told both of them at the end of the year that nobody gets the ball as many times as they want,” said Gailey. “None of them do. I told Fred if we give it to you 25 times, you’ll want it 26. If you catch eight passes he’ll want nine. It’s true that there’s only one football and a bunch of good football players.”

 

Jackson is likely to still see more of the carries out of the backfield, but the difference in workload won’t be by a whole lot.

 

“I wouldn’t call it 50-50, but it’s closer to 50-50 than it ever has been because (Spiller’s) more confident and we have more confidence in him having experience now,” said Gailey. “To me it’s a win-win for everybody except them individually. It’s a win-win for the team. It’s a win-win for setting up game plans and for us making it through the season healthy. It’s not a win-win for each of them individually because neither one of them will get the ball as much as they want to.”

 

So what I get from this is he won't be changing this at all next season, sadly.

 

It really makes no sense considering the Oline men they have built around are better at run blocking, as well. Also the yards per, both running backs average over 5 a carry. The pass game average 6.74 per completion. So with Fitz's and his receivers completions @ 62% or close to 33% misses (more than that but rounding off here) take away a third of the yardage and you get about 4.5-5 yards an attempt and statistically a bigger gamble on failure. The Bills would be a better team if they were run the ball first team. Judging from their own stats.

Also I don't like the fact that since he won't give these guys the ball first, he will be creating discontent within the players at the position. This is really my one big gripe about coach Chan (well, not really my only gripe, lol) and I wish it wasn't because I like him and see the difference and excitement he has added to the team on offense. I also think if we pick up a couple of more weapons I.E. VJ or something we will really need to spread the ball around and balance will be even more important. Too many weapons is a great thing as long as you stay with what is working.

Edited January 17, 2012 by bowery4

[Buffalo Barbarian]

the playoffs are showing that you still need to be physical and run the ball. (I'm agreeing with you)

Edited January 17, 2012 by Buffalo Barbarian

[jjmac]

Ground Chuck, anybody?

[Homey D. Clown]

Honestly, if you execute your game plan very effectively, it really doesn't matter what aspect you favor. Look at the Patriots, they are a heavy pass first team. Both attack styles offer advantages and disadvantages, and can be troublesome when you get your dominant attack plan shut down. I don't totally agree that running the ball is what is best here, it just seems to be convenient to point out the one team that does it well in the playoffs as proof that our coach's plan isn't any good.

 

To be fair to people around here, it's human nature to watch successful teams and judge their success against our team's shortcomings, and I'd love to see an offense that features Freddie and CJ, but these guys also have shown they can be equally as dangerous in the passing game, if not more. RBs in the passing game can create serious mis-matches, and that to me is a very sound game plan(See K-Gun).

 

I love Chan Gailey's conviction, and when we run him out of town and he wins a championship somewhere else, I'll be pulling for him. I don't however think we should have kept any of the former coaches we set sail though, don't mistake me here, I think we finally have a very good head coach in Chan.

[PDaDdy]

I posted this in another thread and have been thinking about it for the last few weeks. I understand why Chan feels the way he does about the ability to pass the ball as a way to set the run. I get the philosophy and reasoning behind it but.... There were games this year where we just didn't stick with the run when it was working and I want to see THAT change. The gameplan against the team you are playing should dictate it as much as the relative stregnth of your teams players to execute it.

Especially with the dual threat we have in the backfield, I think you design your attack around all of your players (as opposed to just the QB and some receivers). I can see against NE* using the spread to build a lead and sticking to it because they run up points and don't have a strong short pass D and we do play them 2xs a year BUT all teams are not NE*. The Cinci game comes to my mind, we switched from what was working and then our D fell apart. It kind of leads to the conclusion that in the 4th you WILL be playing from behind...

 

Stick with what is working until they take it away and running is a bigger strength on this team with our RBs (and I would also say our Oline in run blocking). Chan says he wants a balanced attack but rarely shows that. In fact even on BB right now he is quoted as saying:

 

 

 

So what I get from this is he won't be changing this at all next season, sadly.

 

It really makes no sense considering the Oline men they have built around are better at run blocking, as well. Also the yards per, both running backs average over 5 a carry. The pass game average 6.74 per completion. So with Fitz's and his receivers completions @ 62% or close to 33% misses (more than that but rounding off here) take away a third of the yardage and you get about 4.5-5 yards an attempt and statistically a bigger gamble on failure. The Bills would be a better team if they were run the ball first team. Judging from their own stats.

Also I don't like the fact that since he won't give these guys the ball first, he will be creating discontent within the players at the position. This is really my one big gripe about coach Chan (well, not really my only gripe, lol) and I wish it wasn't because I like him and see the difference and excitement he has added to the team on offense. I also think if we pick up a couple of more weapons I.E. VJ or something we will really need to spread the ball around and balance will be even more important. Too many weapons is a great thing as long as you stay with what is working.

 

Is Marty Schotehiemer available for OC? We could use some Marty ball. Gailey IS a good offensive mind but he does get pass happy when we get down by 2 scores even when the run is working. Obviously how poorly our defense plays figures into the equation which is probably why Gailey goes into pass mode. You can cut it up a bunch of different ways but I think that if the defense improves you will see Gailey stick with the run more.

[bowery4]

Honestly, if you execute your game plan very effectively, it really doesn't matter what aspect you favor. Look at the Patriots, they are a heavy pass first team. Both attack styles offer advantages and disadvantages, and can be troublesome when you get your dominant attack plan shut down. I don't totally agree that running the ball is what is best here, it just seems to be convenient to point out the one team that does it well in the playoffs as proof that our coach's plan isn't any good.

 

To be fair to people around here, it's human nature to watch successful teams and judge their success against our team's shortcomings, and I'd love to see an offense that features Freddie and CJ, but these guys also have shown they can be equally as dangerous in the passing game, if not more. RBs in the passing game can create serious mis-matches, and that to me is a very sound game plan(See K-Gun).

 

I love Chan Gailey's conviction, and when we run him out of town and he wins a championship somewhere else, I'll be pulling for him. I don't however think we should have kept any of the former coaches we set sail though, don't mistake me here, I think we finally have a very good head coach in Chan.

 

I don't want to run Chan out of town. I think it would be great if our dominant attack plan was balanced enough to go from one to the other. I really think we have that possibility and I am excited by it. I like passing to RBs. I used numbers because I think they point out the obvious strength that was kind of skimmed on by Chan during the season. BTW I am intrigued by a K-gun spread (which is kind of how I would describe NE*s, substituting the TE for the RB), we definitely should use hurry up more (and more effectively).

 

Is Marty Schotehiemer available for OC? We could use some Marty ball. Gailey IS a good offensive mind but he does get pass happy when we get down by 2 scores even when the run is working. Obviously how poorly our defense plays figures into the equation which is probably why Gailey goes into pass mode. You can cut it up a bunch of different ways but I think that if the defense improves you will see Gailey stick with the run more.

 

Hah, honestly my opinion is Marty is overrated and not much of an innovator, which might be okay (because of the results but) I like Chan and want to see how it goes next year. I agree a good D would make a whole lot more possible. I am hoping they improve a lot on the D.

[Homey D. Clown]

I don't want to run Chan out of town. I think it would be great if our dominant attack plan was balanced enough to go from one to the other. I really think we have that possibility and I am excited by it. I like passing to RBs. I used numbers because I think they point out the obvious strength that was kind of skimmed on by Chan during the season. BTW I am intrigued by a K-gun spread (which is kind of how I would describe NE*s, substituting the TE for the RB), we definitely should use hurry up more (and more effectively).

 

 

I was more implying that RW and company would run him out of town, sorry about that, but I do agree that we should run the ball more given the talent we have at the position, and hopefully we will see less of the wildcat, which I hate, along with the tampa2 on the other side of the ball.

[jjmac]

I was more implying that RW and company would run him out of town, sorry about that, but I do agree that we should run the ball more given the talent we have at the position, and hopefully we will see less of the wildcat, which I hate, along with the tampa2 on the other side of the ball.

 

Why the hate? The wildcat just brings a different dimension the offense, and I didn't know we were running the Tampa 2.

[spartacus]

I posted this in another thread and have been thinking about it for the last few weeks. I understand why Chan feels the way he does about the ability to pass the ball as a way to set the run. I get the philosophy and reasoning behind it but.... There were games this year where we just didn't stick with the run when it was working and I want to see THAT change. The gameplan against the team you are playing should dictate it as much as the relative stregnth of your teams players to execute it.

Especially with the dual threat we have in the backfield, I think you design your attack around all of your players (as opposed to just the QB and some receivers). I can see against NE* using the spread to build a lead and sticking to it because they run up points and don't have a strong short pass D and we do play them 2xs a year BUT all teams are not NE*. The Cinci game comes to my mind, we switched from what was working and then our D fell apart. It kind of leads to the conclusion that in the 4th you WILL be playing from behind...

 

Stick with what is working until they take it away and running is a bigger strength on this team with our RBs (and I would also say our Oline in run blocking). Chan says he wants a balanced attack but rarely shows that. In fact even on BB right now he is quoted as saying:

 

 

 

So what I get from this is he won't be changing this at all next season, sadly.

 

It really makes no sense considering the Oline men they have built around are better at run blocking, as well. Also the yards per, both running backs average over 5 a carry. The pass game average 6.74 per completion. So with Fitz's and his receivers completions @ 62% or close to 33% misses (more than that but rounding off here) take away a third of the yardage and you get about 4.5-5 yards an attempt and statistically a bigger gamble on failure. The Bills would be a better team if they were run the ball first team. Judging from their own stats.

Also I don't like the fact that since he won't give these guys the ball first, he will be creating discontent within the players at the position. This is really my one big gripe about coach Chan (well, not really my only gripe, lol) and I wish it wasn't because I like him and see the difference and excitement he has added to the team on offense. I also think if we pick up a couple of more weapons I.E. VJ or something we will really need to spread the ball around and balance will be even more important. Too many weapons is a great thing as long as you stay with what is working.

 

your entire premise is flawed

 

you base your desire on running the ball on the misconception that the Bills have an OL that can dominate at the LOS when the D is not spread ou.

 

The Bills OL is not good and can not generate a power running game from a traditional set.

 

Teh only way the Bills generate run production is as a direcct by-product of the spread offense creating running lanes-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[T master]

your entire premise is flawed

 

you base your desire on running the ball on the misconception that the Bills have an OL that can dominate at the LOS when the D is not spread ou.

 

The Bills OL is not good and can not generate a power running game from a traditional set.

 

Teh only way the Bills generate run production is as a direcct by-product of the spread offense creating running lanes-

 

WOW you could have fooled me !! I seem to remember Fred being one of if not the most productive back in the NFL at the beginning of the season & not bad even when we were losing . If he wouldn't have gotten hurt probably he goes to the pro bowl ! Along with Wood !!

 

So apparently our O line isn't too bad . We were 3rd least in the league for sacks ALL YEAR so they couldn't have sucked all that bad . And that was with our starting center out for the last part of the year !!!

[thewildrabbit]

your entire premise is flawed

 

you base your desire on running the ball on the misconception that the Bills have an OL that can dominate at the LOS when the D is not spread out.

 

The Bills OL is not good and can not generate a power running game from a traditional set.

 

The only way the Bills generate run production is as a direct by-product of the spread offense creating running lanes-

 

 

Most posters here truly believe the Bills have a great O line because of so few sacks given up and the production from Fred Jackson and CJ Spiller. Its almost impossible to convince fans otherwise

 

The reason for so few sacks is because the Bills utilize a quick, short passing scheme, and Ryan Fitzpatrick can get the ball out in under 3 seconds. Most times he has to.... because he usually doesn't have more the 3 seconds in the pocket.

 

Also, a lot of those yards by the RB's were because they broke long runs. The reason for the long runs was because when teams did try to play up on the line, or stack the box to try and stop that short passing game. They were caught to close to the line of scrimmage and once the RB broke out its was a long gain before anyone caught them.

 

FJ is still the #20th rusher even after getting injured in game 11. he had 10 runs of over 20 yards-some long gains in different games, 24-43-21-21-22-80-43-23-19. He was averaging a career best 5.5 YPC this year because of those long runs. Even Spiller started to duplicate the success that FJ had only without Eric Wood at center. He had long runs of 35-16-24-38-12 during his 6 games of starting.

 

My problem with the current offense is Gailey calls way to many passing plays, and passes to set up the pass.

 

 

 

Perhaps the older fans will remember that Ted Marchibroda ran the spread offense with Jim Kelly at RB and Thurman Thomas and both made it into the HoF because of that spread offense. Tom Brady and the Patriots use the spread offense, even empty backfield sets

 

If anyone would care to look up the numbers of that late 80's early 90's Bills teams you would find that the Bills often ran more then they threw. Take 1990 for example(the year they set the league on fire for #1offense in the NFL) 425 attempts passing vs 479 attempts rushing. The Bills ran to set up the pass. All everyone remembers tho is the K gun & no huddle, to bad they don't remember that team was such a great dominate running team.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Fear the Beard

[PDaDdy]

your entire premise is flawed

 

you base your desire on running the ball on the misconception that the Bills have an OL that can dominate at the LOS when the D is not spread ou.

 

The Bills OL is not good and can not generate a power running game from a traditional set.

 

Teh only way the Bills generate run production is as a direcct by-product of the spread offense creating running lanes-

 

You can run out of the K-gun which was a spread if I am not mistaken. Some guy named Thurman did pretty well as have our RBs. I think our line has done a better job of run blocking specifically this year. We can still line up in a spread formation AND chose to run more! When your top backs are averaging 5 yards per carry and Spiller is always one defender away from scoring we should go to it more. It would also end up opening up the pass as they would keep more defenders in the box to stop what is OBVIOUSLY successful for us. It's a time tested method that I think we would be very good at given our personnel. Run to set up the pass. Gailey's formations and creativity are good in my opinion, he just needs to switch up that one philosophy and use the run to set up the pass.

 

That being said when the WRs, our best offensive lineman and center Eric Wood and FJ were healthy it was all working and we weren't having the discussions. Get healthy on offense AND defense and I think we will be fine. With a better defense Gailey won't have to panic and play catch up pass happy mode all day.

[bowery4]

your entire premise is flawed

 

you base your desire on running the ball on the misconception that the Bills have an OL that can dominate at the LOS when the D is not spread ou.

 

The Bills OL is not good and can not generate a power running game from a traditional set.

 

Teh only way the Bills generate run production is as a direcct by-product of the spread offense creating running lanes-

 

You certainly can run out of the spread, you can even have your QB under center and have 2 TEs and run play-action. There are tons of variations, so I don't understand how my reasoning is flawed. I never said to give up the spread and wouldn't dream of it. Actually I agree that the Oline was made to look better by the schemes and offensive philosophy they use. If you look to the number of hits Fitz took after the pass (which I can't find the stats but is 5 or 6 times as many), instead of the number of sacks it is truly evident that we need to run more.

 

You can run out of the K-gun which was a spread if I am not mistaken. Some guy named Thurman did pretty well as have our RBs. I think our line has done a better job of run blocking specifically this year. We can still line up in a spread formation AND chose to run more! When your top backs are averaging 5 yards per carry and Spiller is always one defender away from scoring we should go to it more. It would also end up opening up the pass as they would keep more defenders in the box to stop what is OBVIOUSLY successful for us. It's a time tested method that I think we would be very good at given our personnel. Run to set up the pass. Gailey's formations and creativity are good in my opinion, he just needs to switch up that one philosophy and use the run to set up the pass.

 

That being said when the WRs, our best offensive lineman and center Eric Wood and FJ were healthy it was all working and we weren't having the discussions. Get healthy on offense AND defense and I think we will be fine. With a better defense Gailey won't have to panic and play catch up pass happy mode all day.

 

I can remember this discussion happening on game days in the shout box all season long, even during wins and more importantly during close losses, it wasn't always at panic points and even when it was seeing them line up in 5 wide on 3rd and short and never try a bull rush with Corey or any kind of variation kind of drove me nuts (especially during the losing streak) and I realize there were injuries etc.. but running is/or at least should be easier with a bunch of 300 lbs guys at least against some of those teams. I hope that a good defense (which I think will be better next year) make this kind of self correcting but the reason I quoted Chan was because I have my doubts about it. I hope for the best though. I think it will be interesting to see next year.