Offense almost unwatchable....

[FireChan]

 

 

how about playing to exploit our opponents weaknesses too? and coming up with a gameplan that uses our strengths to do so? if the passing game is a weakness, then sure, lets not lean on orton heavily against a team with a bad run D, and pick our shots instead of forcing it.

 

Our running game is a weakness too. The whole offense is a weakness.

[Dan]

 

And the point I've been making all along is that with Orton/Lewis/Manuel/Tuel at quarterback and with the OL in its present form, there aren't a whole lot of strengths to play to.

 

And that's the point... we don't have one of the top 5 QBs in the league. So, why draw up a game plan that asks your QB to come out throwing, especially when its against a defense that excels at defending the pass?

 

As stated upthread, there's ways to design an offense to mask your player's weaknesses. All coaches do that, yet our staff are reluctant to do that.

Our guards suck, so why do the majority of the run plays follow them? Our QB sucks, so why do we keep throwing deep outs? Our TEs suck, so why do we put all 3 on the field at the same time!? Why do we rarely see screens? Where's the misdirection? Play action? Where's any sort of creative play design that would mask a weakness and take advantage of an aggressive defense that's stacking the box?

 

Yes, Orton makes bad reads and misses throws. That's not the point. The point is the OC is consistently putting him in the position to miss those exact same reads and throws over and over. And its the same with the run game.

 

The bottom line is this... this team is in all likelihood goinf to miss the playoffs again. We have a top 5 ranked defense, and a bottom 10 ranked offense. If you look at all major indices, the defense has improved this year in comparison to last year. On the other hand, a similar comparison shows the offense is either the same or slightly worse, statistically. Supposedly, we upgraded our line and WR positions with draft picks, added more depth at RB, upgraded the QB position, and we have a second year in the system. At what point do you say the offensive coaching isn't getting it done?

 

[The Big Cat]

And that's the point... we don't have one of the top 5 QBs in the league. So, why draw up a game plan that asks your QB to come out throwing, especially when its against a defense that excels at defending the pass?

 

As stated upthread, there's ways to design an offense to mask your player's weaknesses. All coaches do that, yet our staff are reluctant to do that.

Our guards suck, so why do the majority of the run plays follow them? Our QB sucks, so why do we keep throwing deep outs? Our TEs suck, so why do we put all 3 on the field at the same time!? Why do we rarely see screens? Where's the misdirection? Play action? Where's any sort of creative play design that would mask a weakness and take advantage of an aggressive defense that's stacking the box?

 

Yes, Orton makes bad reads and misses throws. That's not the point. The point is the OC is consistently putting him in the position to miss those exact same reads and throws over and over. And its the same with the run game.

 

The bottom line is this... this team is in all likelihood goinf to miss the playoffs again. We have a top 5 ranked defense, and a bottom 10 ranked offense. If you look at all major indices, the defense has improved this year in comparison to last year. On the other hand, a similar comparison shows the offense is either the same or slightly worse, statistically. Supposedly, we upgraded our line and WR positions with draft picks, added more depth at RB, upgraded the QB position, and we have a second year in the system. At what point do you say the offensive coaching isn't getting it done?

 

But at one point do you acknowledge our weaknesses and acknowledge that defenses design for our limited strengths and take them away!?

 

When your weaknesses out number your strengths like ours do, then what are you really asking for!?

 

Also, can we please stop with the Gailey comparisons?

 

[billsfan1959]

Virtually the same? You mean minus Andy Levitre, Pears playing out of position and a seventh round rookie at RT?

 

I feel like "virtually the same" is a convenient stretch.

 

 

 

 

This a myth.

 

Seriously, look it up.

 

In Gailey's best statistical year (2011), after the bye week, once the wheels fell off, the team averaged a whopping 18.4 ppg.

 

Compare that to the 22 (albeit still not impressive) we're scoring now.

Over 5 YPC and almost 140 yds per game rushing....compared to 3.8 YPC and 98 yds per game now. I can play that game too.

 

Oh, and by the way, Gaily didn't have the advantage of having the #1 average starting field position in the NFL thanks to the defense - or a defense that was primarily more responsible for offensive points than the offense. For example, yesterday the defense scored one touchdown and gave the ball to the offense on Cleveland's side of the field where the offense managed a measly 26 total yards and 1 first down before kicking 3 FGs. So, let me see, that is 16 of the 26 points.

 

But, hey, keep waving the banner and crusading forward. I'm sure Nate appreciates it...

[The Big Cat]

Over 5 YPC and almost 140 yds per game rushing....compared to 3.8 YPC and 98 yds per game now. I can play that game too.

 

Oh, and by the way, Gaily didn't have the advantage of having the #1 average starting field position in the NFL thanks to the defense - or a defense that was primarily more responsible for offensive points than the offense. For example, yesterday the defense scored one touchdown and gave the ball to the offense on Cleveland's side of the field where the offense managed a measly 26 total yards and 1 first down before kicking 3 FGs. So, let me see, that is 16 of the 26 points.

 

But, hey, keep waving the banner and crusading forward. I'm sure Nate appreciates it...

 

Or you could just completely ignore the side by side comparison I just posted.

[billsfan1959]

Or you could just completely ignore the side by side comparison I just posted.

You might want to check your stats. Buffalo is not averaging 349 yds per game. They are averaging 319 yds per game - which is worse than last year and under Gaily. No matter how you try to spin it, they are worse with more talent. As for PPG, refer to my last post. This year, the defense is far more responsible for the number of PPG than the offense - and Gaily never had near that advantage.

[NewEra]

 

 

Right, we have some better receivers now. May be that's why the offense has performed better than it ever did with Chan here.

 

Stats don't show the entire story. Cry all you want. If chans offense had THIS defense, the stats would dwarf this offenses stats. You can deny deny deny all you want, but this defense dominates opponents, gets the ball back quick, shortens the field for our offense, actually scores points that counts toward the offensive stats you post and makes life much easier for the offense. Chan had a record setting defense. Not good records. The eyeball test in watching a game. Look at stats all you want. They only tell half of the story. You know better than that. Don't even try and deny this or you'll completely discredit yourself.

[FireChan]

Stats don't show the entire story. Cry all you want. If chans offense had THIS defense, the stats would dwarf this offenses stats. You can deny deny deny all you want, but this defense dominates opponents, gets the ball back quick, shortens the field for our offense, actually scores points that counts toward the offensive stats you post and makes life much easier for the offense. Chan had a record setting defense. Not good records. The eyeball test in watching a game. Look at stats all you want. They only tell half of the story. You know better than that. Don't even try and deny this or you'll completely discredit yourself.

 

Prove it.

[billsfan1959]

Stats don't show the entire story. Cry all you want. If chans offense had THIS defense, the stats would dwarf this offenses stats. You can deny deny deny all you want, but this defense dominates opponents, gets the ball back quick, shortens the field for our offense, actually scores points that counts toward the offensive stats you post and makes life much easier for the offense. Chan had a record setting defense. Not good records. The eyeball test in watching a game. Look at stats all you want. They only tell half of the story. You know better than that. Don't even try and deny this or you'll completely discredit yourself.

Amen

[The Big Cat]

Stats don't show the entire story. Cry all you want. If chans offense had THIS defense, the stats would dwarf this offenses stats. You can deny deny deny all you want, but this defense dominates opponents, gets the ball back quick, shortens the field for our offense, actually scores points that counts toward the offensive stats you post and makes life much easier for the offense. Chan had a record setting defense. Not good records. The eyeball test in watching a game. Look at stats all you want. They only tell half of the story. You know better than that. Don't even try and deny this or you'll completely discredit yourself.

 

The argument isn't whether Chan would succeed with this defense. I've never disputed that. In fact, since last year, I've bemoaned what might have been with Chan/Pettine.

[PromoTheRobot]

My point was that everything is a frickin' disaster at TBD. We're the worst, we suck, unwatchable, yadda yadda. All with a team at 7-5. Have some perspective, why don'cha? While not great, our offense is not anywhere near some of the epic bad Bills teams. Maybe I'm debating 12 year olds, in which case you get a mulligan. But for someone with 1972 in their name I just figured would know better.

[Dan]

But at one point do you acknowledge our weaknesses and acknowledge that defenses design for our limited strengths and take them away!?

 

When your weaknesses out number your strengths like ours do, then what are you really asking for!?

 

Also, can we please stop with the Gailey comparisons?

 

Actually, I said compare this year to last year, not Gailey's last year... but ok. Should we compare points scored when some of those points are scored by the defense? If you just look at the YPG rank, we've dropped 5 places since Gailey's last year (10 since his good year!). Even that number could be skewed if we factor in starting field position and number of possessions.

 

Regardless of what measure or point in time we're looking at, the trend remains the same. And that is a trend of little to no improvement. Yet, isn't Orton supposed to be an upgrade to Fitz or EJ or Thad? Isn't Sammy an upgrade to Stevie? Isn't Boobie and upgrade to whoever else we had? Shouldn't we expect players to get better the longer they play under one scheme, like most of our offensive players have?

 

And to your point about defenses taking away our strengths... I agree. Which is all the more reason our offense should be mixing things up. But, they're not. We're running the same offense that we have all season, regardless of opponent.

[The Big Cat]

You might want to check your stats. Buffalo is not averaging 349 yds per game. They are averaging 319 yds per game - which is worse than last year and under Gaily. No matter how you try to spin it, they are worse with more talent. As for PPG, refer to my last post. This year, the defense is far more responsible for the number of PPG than the offense - and Gaily never had near that advantage.

 

Where, precisely, do they have more talent?

 

At WR? Okay. We swapped Stevie and Jones for Watkins and Woods. That's an upgrade.

TE: same.

OL: worse.

QB: WORSE.

RB: same.

 

 

 

They have better receivers and a worse QB. Hardly amounts to the sweeping talent overhaul Chan revisionist would have you believe.

[NoSaint]

 

 

Also, can we please stop with the Gailey comparisons?

 

 

that 2011 season, 5.7 yards per play (with 5.1 and 5.6 the others) -- Hacketts two years 4.8 and 5.1

 

just another way to cut the numbers. though i agree gailey vs hackett isnt a productive talk here.

[The Big Cat]

Actually, I said compare this year to last year, not Gailey's last year... but ok. Should we compare points scored when some of those points are scored by the defense? If you just look at the YPG rank, we've dropped 5 places since Gailey's last year (10 since his good year!). Even that number could be skewed if we factor in starting field position and number of possessions.

 

Regardless of what measure or point in time we're looking at, the trend remains the same. And that is a trend of little to no improvement. Yet, isn't Orton supposed to be an upgrade to Fitz or EJ or Thad? Isn't Sammy an upgrade to Stevie? Isn't Boobie and upgrade to whoever else we had? Shouldn't we expect players to get better the longer they play under one scheme, like most of our offensive players have?

 

And to your point about defenses taking away our strengths... I agree. Which is all the more reason our offense should be mixing things up. But, they're not. We're running the same offense that we have all season, regardless of opponent.

 

But we keep hearing how much better the offense was under Gailey. That's just false. For the most part, it's been a lateral shift. If you have isolate Gailey's best year out of three to make your point about a coaching staff that's been around for half the time and have started twice as many quarterbacks, fine.

 

Also, I don't believe Orton is an upgrade over Fitz. At all.

[NewEra]

 

 

Or you could just completely ignore the side by side comparison I just posted.

 

Or you could wake up and realize that side by side comparisons don't carry much weight when one team has the worst defense in franchise history and the other team has one of the best

[The Big Cat]

that 2011 season, 5.7 yards per play (with 5.1 and 5.6 the others) -- Hacketts two years 4.8 and 5.1

 

just another way to cut the numbers. though i agree gailey vs hackett isnt a productive talk here.

 

And that was the whole point. To put to rest these revisionist memories of how spectacular the Gailey offenses were. I mean, c'mon, in his BEST year--which was significantly better than the other two--he just barely squeaked above average in YPG and PPG rankings...

[GG]

Virtually the same? You mean minus Andy Levitre, Pears playing out of position and a seventh round rookie at RT?

 

I feel like "virtually the same" is a convenient stretch.

 

Not a stretch at all, and is part of the offensive issues. Levitre is the only one gone. So answer the question you posed - why is Pears playing woefully out of position? Why did it nearly take a palace revolt to get Urbik back into the line up? Henderson may have a bright future, but is he really better than Hairston?

 

We may never know, but Marrone has a definite history of sitting better players to make whatever point he's trying to make. And he should be buying Schwartz dinners and paying his mortgage too, because that's the only reason this team remains in contention.

[NoSaint]

 

 

Where, precisely, do they have more talent?

 

At WR? Okay. We swapped Stevie and Jones for Watkins and Woods. That's an upgrade.

TE: same.

OL: worse.

QB: WORSE.

RB: same.

 

 

 

They have better receivers and a worse QB. Hardly amounts to the sweeping talent overhaul Chan revisionist would have you believe.

 

the WR jump is quite large

i think our backs as a group of 4 are better, though you could argue that freddy has slowed to even it out

qb i think is pretty much the same caliber

OL i think is of not distant caliber (remember, cordy was only a rookie in chans final year) that 2011 season was Demetrius bell, levitre, wood (10games), urbik, pears.... in 2012 sam young started a month. that we sat this year urbik isnt a great endorsement of our coaching either

Edited December 1, 2014 by NoSaint

[The Big Cat]

Or you could wake up and realize that side by side comparisons don't carry much weight when one team has the worst defense in franchise history and the other team has one of the best

 

The lengths we've gone now to criticize the OC (who admittedly deserves it, mind you, just not to the dizzying extent plastered all over this board) have reached a critical mass of what the !@#$-itude.