o-line the real problem

[JohnC]

That's the thing though, TT is a HUGE reason for the effectiveness of the running game. His yards, and ability to keep people at home because of his legs are a part of the reason for the success. An upgraded passing game would come at the expense of the running game. In saying that it would help you come from behind but hurt you in protecting leads. It's a matter of what's the best course of action. As this team is constructed the offense is operating at a high level.

 

I keep posting it but the Bills have the highest YPC as far back as you can tell on ESPN (2002 season). The last 480 NFL teams have averaged less per carry than this Bills team. Would the offense be better with a better passing game but worse running game? The answer is who knows. They are scoring a ton of points though.

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with your premise that having an impressive running game that includes TT's running prowess is a formula for success. Getting good YPC stats does not translate into meaningful success in this league. That's an old school formula that is outdated. (My opinion.)

 

Would I trade a superlative running game for a more complete and sophisticated passing game? Unequivocally yes! So what if an exceptional running game is diminished to being average to good? If it gets you more wins I'll gladly accept the decline in stats to greater team success. Look at the difference that Derek Carr has made in Oakland. He has elevated a team that has flaws on both sides of the ball and turned them into serious playoff contenders. The dramatic positive change has little to do with their running game or even their defense. It has to do with his passing talents in a league where the rules promote the passing game.

 

There is too much infatuation with our gaudy running statistics. What has it gotten us? Nowhere meaningful. My contention is strongly held that unless there is quality play at the qb position that includes a well rounded passing game you achieve little when all is said and done.

 

Last year Denver was the exception to the rule on how to construct a SB team. To me it is a mistake to cite the exception to the rule as a recipe for success when the odds are stacked in favor to those teams that can proficiently pass the ball. The object of the game is not to win the battle of stats as it is to take the best approach that can win you more games.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

This is what I see and it's painful. With a Trent Green/Kirk Cousins/Dalton type this team would be amazing he helps on the options but I'm not so sure the run game would struggle without him.

 

Are you his agent ?

I don't think that it will struggle but it will certainly be worse. It's been as good of a running game as the league's had in forever. It is eite now. It may regress to good. Is an elite running game and below average passing game better than a good running game and a good passing game? I really don't know and I don't think that anybody can say one or the other. It's a weird situation.

 

The one thing that can be said with confidence is that the defense can't give up TDs on 17 of 18 red zone possessions. That's a pretty clear recipe for failure.

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with your premise that having an impressive running game that includes TT's running prowess is a formula for success. Getting good YPC stats does not translate into meaningful success in this league. That's an old school formula that is outdated. (My opinion.)

 

Would I trade a superlative running game for a more complete and sophisticated passing game? Unequivocally yes! So what if an exceptional running game is diminished to being average to good? If it gets you more wins I'll gladly accept the decline in stats to greater team success. Look at the difference that Derek Carr has made in Oakland. He has elevated a team that has flaws on both sides of the ball and turned them into serious playoff contenders. The dramatic positive change has little to do with their running game or even their defense. It has to do with his passing talents in a league where the rules promote the passing game.

 

There is too much infatuation with our gaudy running statistics. What has it gotten us? Nowhere meaningful. My contention is strongly held that unless there is quality play at the qb position that includes a well rounded passing game you achieve little when all is said and done.

 

Last year Denver was the exception to the rule on how to construct a SB team. To me it is a mistake to cite the exception to the rule as a recipe for success when the odds are stacked in favor to those teams that can proficiently pass the ball. The object of the game is not to win the battle of stats as it is to take the best approach that can win you more games.

I will go back to the points then. The Bills are scoring at a really good clip. Our gaudy running stats are translating to points. That's what an offense tries to accomplish. Again, no offense is designed to overcome your defense giving up 17 TDs in 18 RZ possessions. Edited December 24, 2016 by Kirby Jackson

[jms62]

I don't think that it will struggle but it will certainly be worse. It's been as good of a running game as the league's had in forever. It is eite now. It may regress to good. Is an elite running game and below average passing game better than a good running game and a good passing game? I really don't know and I don't think that anybody can say one or the other. It's a weird situation.

The one thing that can be said with confidence is that the defense can't give up TDs on 17 of 18 red zone possessions. That's a pretty clear recipe for failure. I will go back to the points then. The Bills are scoring at a really good clip. Our gaudy running stats are translating to points. That's what an offense tries to accomplish. Again, no offense is designed to overcome your defense giving up 17 TDs in 18 RZ possessions.

Mind boggling that this isnt so freaking obvious. Mind numbing that some continue to argue with you that you need to risk blowing up what is working in hope that the changes will compnsate for what is not.

[JohnC]

You obviosly are younger than 43

 

Why would you put a QB that is conventional into an unConventional offense and expect better results? This offense has a track record and none of the QB's executing it successfully were conventional. Bills fans should be focused on the points it is generating and not try and "Fix" it thinking adding a passing or conventional QB will make it better. That thinking is really showing the lack of understanding that the scheme is the thing and this is not some stratomatic game where you can simply plug any player into any schme and expect to get the best of both .

You are missing the point. The issue has nothing to do with conventional vs unconventional qb play. The issue is quality qb play vs inadequate qb play. Our offense has an unconventional design to it for the simple reason that our current qb has so many limitations. You can't run a full/well-rounded offense if your qb is incapable of running a full offense. Accepting your limitations instead of finding someone who can play beyond the current limitations is a recipe for entrenched mediocrity.

[Lofton80]

I have been very impressed with #72 at center. He has really been effective. Kuanjo can play LT pretty well. I think an upgrade at RT

makes a huge difference with pressure and blown up plays.

[Augie]

35

I wasn't around for OJ.

I'm not 35, and that was fun to watch!

[jms62]

You are missing the point. The issue has nothing to do with conventional vs unconventional qb play. The issue is quality qb play vs inadequate qb play. Our offense has an unconventional design to it for the simple reason that our current qb has so many limitations. You can't run a full/well-rounded offense if your qb is incapable of running a full offense. Accepting your limitations instead of finding someone who can play beyond the current limitations is a recipe for entrenched mediocrity.

 

No. It is unconventional because Romans success is running this type of offense. And we are still running his offense. It is because of Romans offense that Tyrod was brought into town.

[Maury Ballstein]

Mind boggling that this isnt so freaking obvious. Mind numbing that some continue to argue with you that you need to risk blowing up what is working in hope that the changes will compnsate for what is not.

What is working ?

 

You might want to watch the games again. We are 7-7 with 6 wins coming against sub .500 teams

 

Tyrod will never be good enough to beat good teams with his brand of not passing, for that reason alone it's time to turn the page.

 

Hope he's not 14-28 against the fins again while disappearing in the 4th. Blowouts vs scrubs that inflate numbers isn't a reason to rally around him. Unless you're just a Tyrod fan.

Edited December 24, 2016 by Ryan L Billz

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

What is working ?

 

You might want to watch the games again. We are 7-7 with 6 wins coming against sub .500 teams

 

Tyrod will never be good enough to beat good teams with his brand of not passing, for that reason alone it's time to turn the page.

 

Hope he's not 14-28 against the fins again while disappearing in the 4th. Blowouts vs scrubs that inflate numbers isn't a reason to rally around him. Unless you're just a Tyrod fan.

Unconventional

[Maury Ballstein]

Unconventional

Aka can't read defense/doesn't trust his arm/can't pass.

[JohnC]

I don't think that it will struggle but it will certainly be worse. It's been as good of a running game as the league's had in forever. It is eite now. It may regress to good. Is an elite running game and below average passing game better than a good running game and a good passing game? I really don't know and I don't think that anybody can say one or the other. It's a weird situation.

 

The one thing that can be said with confidence is that the defense can't give up TDs on 17 of 18 red zone possessions. That's a pretty clear recipe for failure.

I will go back to the points then. The Bills are scoring at a really good clip. Our gaudy running stats are translating to points. That's what an offense tries to accomplish. Again, no offense is designed to overcome your defense giving up 17 TDs in 18 RZ possessions.[

 

Make no mistake I also have a scathing view of Rex's defense. However, there is a good reason why Whaley is going to seriously consider not agreeing to TT's option unless the contract is redone. His performance level doesn't justify it.

 

My response to the highlighted are is simple. If the Bills are scoring at a really good clip with a stunted passing game then it stands to reason that it will score at a better clip with a more credible passing game.

 

Again, this discussion is more than about stats. It is about outcomes. Upgrade the level of play at the qb position and the odds improve that this team will be participants in post season games rather than spectators.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Aka can't read defense/doesn't trust his arm/can't pass.

Like I said. Unconventional. Brevity matters

[RyanC883]

WOW! I see Taylor with plenty of time to throw. Not sure what the stats say, but I would put money on the Bills being in the middle of the pack if not higher in terms of giving their QB time in the pocket!

 

I would agree with this. Also not sure how you have the top rushing O-line and blame TT's problems on the O-line.

[Kirby Jackson]

My response to the highlighted are is simple. If the Bills are scoring at a really good clip with a stunted passing game then it stands to reason that it will score at a better clip with a more credible passing game.

This is where we don't necessarily agree. The Bills have 27 rushing TDs through 14 games. The running game is at a level that the league hasn't seen in a really long time. Why do we assume that a better passing game but a worse running game will result in more points?

[Nihilarian]

What is working ?

 

You might want to watch the games again. We are 7-7 with 6 wins coming against sub .500 teams

 

Tyrod will never be good enough to beat good teams with his brand of not passing, for that reason alone it's time to turn the page.

 

Hope he's not 14-28 against the fins again while disappearing in the 4th. Blowouts vs scrubs that inflate numbers isn't a reason to rally around him. Unless you're just a Tyrod fan.

The bolded was my point exactly in regards to the Bills run game looking so dominant. The 2013 Bills run game was #2 in the league in yards and #1 in attempts and went 6-10 with a much crappier line.

 

My take on the YPC average being so good is a combination with Tyrod Taylor getting some big averages when he runs and McCoy putting up some crazy big averages against the bad teams.

 

As far as Tyrod goes just look at his receiver corps this year as Sammy Watkins still is playing injured as is Clay. Woods has had both knee and foot injuries and played injured a lot this year. Last year Watkins was the leading receiver on the team with over 1000 yards, 9 TD's in 13 games played! This year the leading TD scorer is Justin Hunter with 4 TD's from catching a grand total of 9 receptions for 125 yards. Yea, that's right. Sammy has only played in 6 games and has been playing injured in every game.

 

It also helps the offense if the defense was worth a damn that could stop the run and keep the score down to around 25 points. Which looks to be the magic number.

 

Also In my view, Tyrod Taylor has been playing injured quite a bit and somewhat handicapped because of the limitations of his receiver corps. This has hindered his development this year somewhat. With a healthy receiver corps and a better defense, this team is easily in the playoffs this year. We saw this last year too.

[Formerly Allan in MD]

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with your premise that having an impressive running game that includes TT's running prowess is a formula for success. Getting good YPC stats does not translate into meaningful success in this league. That's an old school formula that is outdated. (My opinion.)

 

Would I trade a superlative running game for a more complete and sophisticated passing game? Unequivocally yes! So what if an exceptional running game is diminished to being average to good? If it gets you more wins I'll gladly accept the decline in stats to greater team success. Look at the difference that Derek Carr has made in Oakland. He has elevated a team that has flaws on both sides of the ball and turned them into serious playoff contenders. The dramatic positive change has little to do with their running game or even their defense. It has to do with his passing talents in a league where the rules promote the passing game.

 

There is too much infatuation with our gaudy running statistics. What has it gotten us? Nowhere meaningful. My contention is strongly held that unless there is quality play at the qb position that includes a well rounded passing game you achieve little when all is said and done.

 

Last year Denver was the exception to the rule on how to construct a SB team. To me it is a mistake to cite the exception to the rule as a recipe for success when the odds are stacked in favor to those teams that can proficiently pass the ball. The object of the game is not to win the battle of stats as it is to take the best approach that can win you more games.

+1 New England always has had a decent running game. They didn't win significantly more than they lost until Brady arrived. Ideally, you want both great running and fine passing. My model remains the old Baltimore Colts teams with Johnny Unitas throwing to Ray Barry, Jimmy Orr, and Geno Marchetti and the running of Alan Ameche and L.G. Dupre among others.

[Kirby Jackson]

+1 New England always has had a decent running game. They didn't win significantly more than they lost until Brady arrived. Ideally, you want both great running and fine passing. My model remains the old Baltimore Colts teams with Johnny Unitas throwing to Ray Barry, Jimmy Orr, and Geno Marchetti and the running of Alan Ameche and L.G. Dupre among others.

The point is there is a difference between "a decent running game" and the best of the last 20 years or whatever it is. Just to be clear, I'm not arguing for or against any particular philosophy. All that I am saying is that the running game is elite. It has led to an effective offense that has scored a lot of points.

 

When I take a step back and ask "what went wrong" the offense isn't at the top of the list. They have a +44 scoring differential (Miami is +1 by comparison). The Bills gave up TDs on 17 of 18 red zone possessions and are still +44. Things need to improve for sure but I am not sure that they should take away from what they do best. I'm not sure that will improve you.

Edited December 24, 2016 by Kirby Jackson

[BuffaloFan68]

I totally disagree with this - just saying

Go Bills!!!!!

[USABuffaloFan]

When did we lose all of our reasonable thoughts?

 

When we hit an age that watched the playoff teams of the Bills as adults and now haven't seen one in 16 going on 17 years. Kinda makes you realize what is reasonable.

[USABuffaloFan]

I respectfully but strenuously disagree with your premise that having an impressive running game that includes TT's running prowess is a formula for success. Getting good YPC stats does not translate into meaningful success in this league. That's an old school formula that is outdated. (My opinion.)

 

Did you blow a blood vessel in your head when you strenuously disagreed. You might need a Neuro examination in case you have aneurysm.