dave mcbride Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Last year they allowed 363 yards per game (146 yards rushing), which is pretty bad -- although not as bad as the previous season. In 2011, they gave up 371 yards per game and 170 ypg rushing. This year, through three games they're giving 417 yards per game and 155 ypg rushing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillnutinHouston Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 The question is, how much of that is directly related to the fast offense, it's struggles and the resulting time of possession imbalance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills44 Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 They weren't good against a pedestrian NE* offense, and were embarrassingly bad today. It didn't seem that we blitzed as much as last week, and when we did, the blitzes weren't nearly as effective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marauderswr80 Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Bills D sucks! Sincerely, Geno Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan714 Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 When you make Stephen HIll and Bilal Powell look like all-pros you know you're pretty bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 23, 2013 Author Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) The question is, how much of that is directly related to the fast offense, it's struggles and the resulting time of possession imbalance? I don't think that has a ton do with it. I think the bigger issue is terrible 3rd down stoppage rate. Opposing teams are 23 for 50 so far -- 46 percent. That leads to more offensive plays for the opponent. The one bright spot is that they're allowing 5.3 ypp this year. That's not good, but it's better than the 5.6 in 2012 and 5.9 in 2011. Edited September 23, 2013 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 They weren't good against a pedestrian NE* offense, and were embarrassingly bad today. It didn't seem that we blitzed as much as last week, and when we did, the blitzes weren't nearly as effective. I thought they were good against NE; only some remarkable throws and catches pulled that game out for NE. Today was frustrating, but when you take the best player out of a secondary that was already missing its top two guys, there's going to be some impact. If McKelvin is on Holmes all day, that may very well have made the difference. I think the offense is a much bigger problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) I don't think that has a ton do with it. I think the bigger issue is terrible 3rd down stoppage rate. Opposing teams are 23 for 50 so far -- 46 percent. That leads to more offensive plays for the opponent. But it does have something to do with it. Right now the Bills are allowing 4.3ypc. That's not good and ranked 22nd in the league. The D allows 5.3 yards per play (tied for 16th in the league.) They've allowed teams to convert 3rd downs 46% of the time (ranked 27th in the league.) Lastly, the D has been on the field for 235 snaps - most in the NFL. They're not good at 3rd downs to be sure but there's a disconnect between the stats here. If they're ranked 16 in yards per play, 22nd in yards per carry, and 27th in 3rd down percentage how have they been on the field for 235 snaps, most in the NFL? The number of snaps they are on the field (and consequently how many yards they allow) is directly related to the offenses no huddle "attack" and their penchant for 3 and outs. Edited September 23, 2013 by MDH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Guys, perhaps it's just me, but I don't think the run defense yesterday was bad at all. The overall numbers look ugly, but how many "big" runs did the Jets have to gash the Bills or convert 3rd downs? Very few. Buffalo stuffed a run on 4th and short. This game was lost because of not enough pressure on the pass rush and a D-III CB being asked to cover NFL WRs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 The question is, how much of that is directly related to the fast offense, it's struggles and the resulting time of possession imbalance? Some, but... When you make Stephen HIll and Bilal Powell look like all-pros you know you're pretty bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Guys, perhaps it's just me, but I don't think the run defense yesterday was bad at all. Wow. Really? What do you think bad run D is? No team in the NFL allows every single run at 5 yards plus. Sure, they have quite a few stops for little to no gain. But they also had 14 runs of 5 yards or more against them. The Bills allowed runs of 5, 5, 5, 5, 9, 9, 21, 8, 27, 5, 7, 13, 14, & 7 yesterday. Even with the stops they had that's horrible run D. Just horrible. If CJ had the game Powell had yesterday: 27 carries, 149 yards (5.5ypc) you'd be saying how spectacular he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 23, 2013 Author Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) But it does have something to do with it. Right now the Bills are allowing 4.3ypc. That's not good and ranked 22nd in the league. The D allows 5.3 yards per play (tied for 16th in the league.) They've allowed teams to convert 3rd downs 46% of the time (ranked 27th in the league.) Lastly, the D has been on the field for 235 snaps - most in the NFL. They're not good at 3rd downs to be sure but there's a disconnect between the stats here. If they're ranked 16 in yards per play, 22nd in yards per carry, and 27th in 3rd down percentage how have they been on the field for 235 snaps, most in the NFL? The number of snaps they are on the field (and consequently how many yards they allow) is directly related to the offenses no huddle "attack" and their penchant for 3 and outs. The Jets only ran 70 plays, which is average. The Bills actually ran 75. The Panthers ran 76 to the Bills' 73. What skews the stats is the fact that the Pats ran an ungodly 89 plays, which was purely a function of their ability to convert 11 out of 20 third downs and run the hurry up even faster than the Bills. Plus while the Pats were generally efficient overall, they didn't have any big plays. It was all short-medium stuff, which is why the Bills ypp isn't so bad. Edited September 23, 2013 by dave mcbride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bizell Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 how many plays have we run with all of our starters on defense this year? that might have something to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miyagi-Do Karate Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Guys, perhaps it's just me, but I don't think the run defense yesterday was bad at all. The overall numbers look ugly, but how many "big" runs did the Jets have to gash the Bills or convert 3rd downs? Very few. Buffalo stuffed a run on 4th and short. This game was lost because of not enough pressure on the pass rush and a D-III CB being asked to cover NFL WRs. This is what has me scatching my head. I think the run defense looks good, yet the stats tell me otherwise. I wonder if a better stat is yardage as a function of time of possession. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Wow. Really? What do you think bad run D is? No team in the NFL allows every single run at 5 yards plus. Sure, they have quite a few stops for little to no gain. But they also had 14 runs of 5 yards or more against them. The Bills allowed runs of 5, 5, 5, 5, 9, 9, 21, 8, 27, 5, 7, 13, 14, & 7 yesterday. Even with the stops they had that's horrible run D. Just horrible. If CJ had the game Powell had yesterday: 27 carries, 149 yards (5.5ypc) you'd be saying how spectacular he was. I'm only talking about perception. The Bills' run defense didn't lose that game, and came up with stops at key moments. There are games in which statistics lie, and I think this is one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Wow. Really? What do you think bad run D is? No team in the NFL allows every single run at 5 yards plus. Sure, they have quite a few stops for little to no gain. But they also had 14 runs of 5 yards or more against them. The Bills allowed runs of 5, 5, 5, 5, 9, 9, 21, 8, 27, 5, 7, 13, 14, & 7 yesterday. Even with the stops they had that's horrible run D. Just horrible. If CJ had the game Powell had yesterday: 27 carries, 149 yards (5.5ypc) you'd be saying how spectacular he was. I have a running thread about this, and I'm updating the numbers now. Looking at no. of runs for x no. of yards tells you nothing. It's like measuring a company's profitability by looking only at its revenue. eballl is right, the run defense is improved. period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Let's bring Wanny back! Maybe it's not too late! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Our defense *looks* better. But at the end of the day, we're losing games and not getting off the field, so it really doesn't matter what perception or stats say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDH Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 Our defense *looks* better. But at the end of the day, we're losing games and not getting off the field, so it really doesn't matter what perception or stats say. It doesn't look better though, it's simply more aggressive. People like aggression so they'd rather go out on their sword than death by a 1000 cuts. Well, going out on the sword looks is what we saw yesterday. You get a nicely wrapped scapegoat in Rogers but its' the overall D that's the issue. It gives up running yards in huge chunks, gives up game winning big plays and gets called for far too many penalties. I swear, it's been so long since Bills fans have seen a good D they don't know what one looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted September 23, 2013 Share Posted September 23, 2013 It doesn't look better though, it's simply more aggressive. People like aggression so they'd rather go out on their sword than death by a 1000 cuts. Well, going out on the sword looks is what we saw yesterday. You get a nicely wrapped scapegoat in Rogers but its' the overall D that's the issue. It gives up running yards in huge chunks, gives up game winning big plays and gets called for far too many penalties. I swear, it's been so long since Bills fans have seen a good D they don't know what one looks like. Overall the D is an issue? They're 100% on critical fourth and short stops, they've gotten big sacks and turnovers when they've needed them. Other than a game winning drive by first ballot HOF'er Tom Brady that featured some RIDICULOUS catches from whats-his-face, they've come up big and gotten critical stops all along the way, often in spite of the offense's ability to stay on the field or give htem good field position. I'm sorry, but last year, the defense was the issue. This year, it's the offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts