The Big Cat Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Giving up a 5-yard run is hardly something to brag about, unless it was 3rd and 10. Bottom line is that the Bills allowed 35 rushes for 158 yards (4.5 ypc, 7 rushing first downs). That's bad. Every team that's bad against the run whines about how they stopped the other team "except for one or two plays", but that's what being bad against the run is. No one gives up 4+ yards on 80% of the opposing rush attempts. For comparison, the Bills allowed 32 rushes by the Panthers for 125 yards (3.9 ypc, 9 rushing first downs). An improvement over week 1, but still bad. 3.9 ypc would be fine if the volume was much lower, but the volume was high because we couldn't consistently stop their run game. One thing I will readily concede is that the Bills' run D looks a LOT better this year than the past couple, especially via the eyeball test. Unfortunately, our historically-bad run defenses were so far down that it's possible to significantly improve, but only wind up like 25th in the league. Big Cat, we might not be far off here, since your whole original point was that the Bills' run D "was not that bad," which I guess means that you agree it was bad? We've seen a lot worse in recent years (and faced two pretty good rushing teams so far), and there's reason for hope, but I'm just not ready to anoint the run D as even mediocre until they prove it on the field. I don't think it's bad, I don't think it's good. We're still seeing some big gains, but we're also seeing a higher volume of 1, 0 and negative yard runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just in Atlanta Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Decent stats. But the real question is whether we're "fitting it up" and "living and dying by our Front 4". That's what I really want to know. Maybe we can pick Wanny's brain on how to improve our run D. Anyone have his number down in Tampa Bay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted September 18, 2013 Author Share Posted September 18, 2013 Big Cat, we might not be far off here, since your whole original point was that the Bills' run D "was not that bad," which I guess means that you agree it was bad? We've seen a lot worse in recent years (and faced two pretty good rushing teams so far), and there's reason for hope, but I'm just not ready to anoint the run D as even mediocre until they prove it on the field. Excellent point(s) and a great characterization of the situation. I would interested to see a breakdown of who the opponents are running at. By eyeball, it looks to be Dareus. I say this at the risk of creating the inevitable he is a bust comments. For anyone thinking it don't go down that road. He will improve and the talent and physical ability is clearly there. This is his third system in three years so much like his rookie season I would expect that he will become more of a force as the season goes on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Excellent point(s) and a great characterization of the situation. I would interested to see a breakdown of who the opponents are running at. By eyeball, it looks to be Dareus. I say this at the risk of creating the inevitable he is a bust comments. For anyone thinking it don't go down that road. He will improve and the talent and physical ability is clearly there. This is his third system in three years so much like his rookie season I would expect that he will become more of a force as the season goes on. SEE: Rushing portion of the box scores: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201309080buf.htm http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/201309150buf.htm Pats*: LE: 0 Runs LT: 9, 65 LG: 3, 32 MD: 15, 51 RG: 0 Runs RT: 4, 6 RE: 0 Runs Carolina: LE: 0 Runs LT: 3, 10 LG: 3, 11 MD: 16, 72 RG: 5, 21 RT: 5, 11 RE: 0 Rus TOTALS: LE: 0 Runs LT: 12, 75 (6.25 ypc) LG: 6, 43 (7.16 ypc) MD: 31, 123 (3.96 ypc) RG: 5, 21 (4.2 ypc) RT: 9, 27 (3 ypc) RE: 0 Runs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Cease Fires Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Rankings are practically meaningless two weeks into the season. Two games do not decide how good your (or anyone else's) offense or defense is, as we've seen so many times in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
8-8 Forever? Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 At the end of the day we would all agree that what matters is W-L's. Still, it is nice to see that the Bills team statistics are climbing as compared to previous years. A concern behind the numbers is that the defense ranks 30th against the run. It is puzzling to me with the talent on the Bills line why for so long they have been poor against the run. Pettine will solve this I'm sure. The D is also not helped by the fact that the offense has had too many short drives and lower than desired time of possession. We have a shot at the top 10 in all areas this year. ugh more rankings ... who cares. Carolina and Pats have very good running games and O Lines, so no surprise there. Pettine's defense is risk reward. big plays will be given up AND made by this defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boatdrinks Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 1) Playing New England; we keyed into Brady and probably, as a result, were vulnerable against the run a little. How about the fact that NE has a very good OL and they generally pushed us around for parts of that game? Our DL is still lacking a bit in talent and performance. The point about the D being on the field a lot is correct. The Offense hasn't managed to sustain drives with their 3rd down issues. The D hasn't helped themselves with continued struggles on third and long, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in Chicago Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Maybe I am accustomed to our record-breaking (in a bad way) defensive effort from last year, but I am very pleased with the run defense so far. I think what has skewed that statistic is: 1) Playing New England; we keyed into Brady and probably, as a result, were vulnerable against the run a little. 2) As you mentioned, TOP. The defense has beenreally gassed due to the failure of the offense to have many sustained drives. I would really like to see them slow down on offense. The key is sustaining drives on offense not necessarily the pace itself. If the O works at a fast clip and continues getting first downs, the opposing D is going to be really gassed allowing more scoring opportunities at the end of those drives. There may be some situations where slowing down may be valid but in general, I am not against the quick pace per se Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Your stats: 20+: 2 15-19: 1 10-15: 3 5-10: 3 2-5: 12 0-1: 11 -0: 3 To me this does suggest a problem and I disagree with your assessment that it was not reason for concern. You pointed to 19 runs of 3 yards or less which btw is hidden in your stats above. I point to 9 runs of 5 or more yards because these either likely ended up in 1st downs or set the next play up well. 6 of those runs were for first down or more which keeps drives alive and set up scoring opportunities. At the end of the day, the overall results say the Bills are not much better than they were last year against the run. This is a problem IMO especially since the Pats* are not known as a running team. (Is anyone any more? But clearly the success of the Patsies* is through Brady's arm) I still believe the Bills have cleaning up to do. New England had the 7th-ranked rushing offense last season, averaging 136.5 yards per game. They had 523 rushing attempts last season, second most in the league, with an average of 4.2 yards per carry. By contrast, the Bills ran only 442 times last season, or 27.6 times per game. They may not be "known" as a running team, but they are very much a running team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 New England had the 7th-ranked rushing offense last season, averaging 136.5 yards per game. They had 523 rushing attempts last season, second most in the league, with an average of 4.2 yards per carry. By contrast, the Bills ran only 442 times last season, or 27.6 times per game. They may not be "known" as a running team, but they are very much a running team. Totally agreed. I tried to make this point before the game. In all seriousness, I blame Fantasy Football. Absent a RB stud, nobody thinks of the Pats* as what they are: a team that runs the ball VERY effectively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 (edited) SEE: Rushing portion of the box scores: http://www.pro-footb...01309080buf.htm http://www.pro-footb...01309150buf.htm Pats*: LE: 0 Runs LT: 9, 65 LG: 3, 32 MD: 15, 51 RG: 0 Runs RT: 4, 6 RE: 0 Runs Carolina: LE: 0 Runs LT: 3, 10 LG: 3, 11 MD: 16, 72 RG: 5, 21 RT: 5, 11 RE: 0 Rus TOTALS: LE: 0 Runs LT: 12, 75 (6.25 ypc) LG: 6, 43 (7.16 ypc) MD: 31, 123 (3.96 ypc) RG: 5, 21 (4.2 ypc) RT: 9, 27 (3 ypc) RE: 0 Runs So in our standard front... Carrington and Kyle Williams are to blame? Though, we change where guys line up quite a bit, so I'm not really sure what to make of it. I can deal with 3.96, 4.2 and 3.0, but the 7.16 and 6.25 are inexcusable. Edited September 18, 2013 by Dorkington Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cash Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Totally agreed. I tried to make this point before the game. In all seriousness, I blame Fantasy Football. Absent a RB stud, nobody thinks of the Pats* as what they are: a team that runs the ball VERY effectively. Disagree. Stevan Ridley was an absolute stud last year, and anyone paying attention knew it. The casual fan probably looked at Brady and NE's reputation as a passing team and figured they were more of the same last year. Us fantasy players, however, knew that NE's run game had taken a major step up from 2011. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Disagree. Stevan Ridley was an absolute stud last year, and anyone paying attention knew it. The casual fan probably looked at Brady and NE's reputation as a passing team and figured they were more of the same last year. Us fantasy players, however, knew that NE's run game had taken a major step up from 2011. But let's be honest. ridley is a stud because of Brady. You can't crowd the line against the Pats last year. Now that the Pats have pretty garbage wrs, Ridley is doing nothing (and I have him in a keeper league ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBill Posted September 18, 2013 Author Share Posted September 18, 2013 New England had the 7th-ranked rushing offense last season, averaging 136.5 yards per game. They had 523 rushing attempts last season, second most in the league, with an average of 4.2 yards per carry. By contrast, the Bills ran only 442 times last season, or 27.6 times per game. They may not be "known" as a running team, but they are very much a running team. 477 of their total team 2184 yards came against the Bills this means in their remaining games they averaged 121 yards per game. Not a big change but this actually bumps them down three spots to 10th in the league. Not saying that this proves anything other than the fact that teams have to give Brady so much attention they can't overplay the run. It was more impressive to me that the Bills finished higher given that Fitznomagic was not a long ball threat at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bananathumb Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Dareus = statue on roller skates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You herd it hear last Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 I'd say the biggest downside regarding the run is that the Pats ran all over us. Thought it cleaned up a bit against the Pats. Who are a better running team IMO. choose your poison. 175 rushing yards or marsha 4 td's and 350+ yards passing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ko12010 Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 Dareus = statue on roller skates Good one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 1) Playing New England; we keyed into Brady and probably, as a result, were vulnerable against the run a little. Pettine even made mention to this. He said there were times he changed the game plan/play call because he thought they would be passing and ran. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewildrabbit Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 30th against the run after two games...kinda glad teams are trying to throw so much at the Bills depleted secondary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted September 18, 2013 Share Posted September 18, 2013 (edited) rankings and stats are two different things. Stats are factual but can be misleading due to SoS or teams decimated by injury Rankings (power) are perception most of the time speaking of rankings CBS sports and Putrid Prisco have the Putz at #3??/ say whaaaa the only sensible thing I saw was Bills up 4 EJ Manuel is off to a good start as a rookie quarterback. He's proving me wrong in a big way. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/powerrankings Edited September 18, 2013 by BillsFan-4-Ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts