Jump to content

The turnover puzzle


WIDE LEFT

Recommended Posts

Conventional wisdom is that the team that wins the turnover battle wins the game; and statistics bear this out. So the Bills lose two games this season despite winning the turnover battle in each game. So what's going on? Well what you usually see in games where a team wins the turnover battle but loses the game is that the team employs an ultra conservative offensive game plan. The Bills in the Dick Jauron era were famous for this, winning the turnover battle but losing games, or winning the turnover battle by a wide margin but just squeaking out a win. Of course Jauron set offensive football back about 3 decades, with his god awful conservative, simpleton offenses.

 

OC Hackett is guilty here. Jets ( and Pats) stacked the box and dared the Bills to throw, but OC Hackett wasted way too many offensive downs by running the ball into the teeth of the defense, very predictably on first and second down. Wasted opportunity after opportunity.

 

And I love the often articulated (but very wrong) strategy that you have to establish the run to set up the passing game. It rests on the idea that with the defense playing up to defend the run, the passing game opens up. But the Jets (and soon the rest of the league) is already playing run first with their defenders up, so why are we running into the teeth of that. If the defense is playing run first, why do we continue to run first? It's a recipe for failure, and even winning the turnover battle cannot overcome this flawed offensive game plan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This game was winnable.

 

Adjustments are key to keeping any job.

 

If things do not change, mediocre and recognizable play calling will eventually cause us another regime change in the future--again!

 

Turnovers do kill this team at the moment, but the trend of 3 and outs hurts just as much.

Edited by KollegeStudnet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...