Bills defense is overrated.

[dave mcbride]

6 minutes ago, ScottLaw said:

They could manage without another pass rusher, but it would be hard to pass up and give the defense exactly what it needs to put them over the top. 

 

I wouldn't be upset if they traded down either, but if I had the choice between taken a potential terrific pass rushing Dlineman or trading down, it would be hard to pass on pass rusher.

I suspect that if they end up in the top 6 (they're playing three teams all in the hunt over the next 3 weeks) at 5-11 or so, they'll be in position for a trade-down because someone will want a QB. 

[billsfan89]

49 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

No.  It's not.

 

This borderline elite D gave up 4th Q TD drives of 11 plays/85 yards and 9 plays/61 yards---against the NY Jets----to lose the game.

 

One game does not a season make, any defense has bad games where they give up a bad clutch drives. Even the Bears defense (a defense most consider to be the best or among the best) got 30 points hung on them by the Giants with several long clutch drives last week, they also gave up 31 points to the Fins earlier in the year. When analyzing a defense you have to take a look at more than just one or two games. You can argue they are a good but far from elite defense and make a compelling case. However your argument has to be better than well in this one game they stunk. 

[LSHMEAB]

2014 was the last time the Bills had a "great" defense and probably the only time since Phillips.

 

You want to know the key? They had 2 edge rushers with 10 plus sacks. Hughes had 10 and Mario had 14.5

 

They will never be elite with this group of pass rushers.

[blacklabel]

They can't do it all on their own. Considering some of the lopsided losses they've had this season, it's a big time credit to the players and coaches that they now sit at first in overall yards allowed and first for passing yards allowed. They have created turnover opportunities this season but the ball just hasn't bounced their way like it did in 2017. That first Jets game they forced what, three fumbles and somehow the Jets recovered all of them.

 

I understand they have confidence that their front four will get pressure, but there have been a couple of games now (this last one included) where they didn't generate much pressure and recorded zero sacks and zero hits on Darnold. That's a little bit unacceptable. If you're not getting home with four, switch it up, create some pressure, send five or six, give the kid a real exotic look he'll have a hard time deciphering. They don't have to do these things all the time but it would be nice if they sprinkled some of this stuff into their game plans on the regular. 

 

Very talented young group, though, so, sky's the limit I feel. The only two major contributors they could lose after this season are Kyle and Lorenzo but i wouldn't be surprised if Lorenzo came back. He's really excelled in the role they have him in and he gets to play both off the ball and on it and I believe at this point he is the sack leader on the team. His career as a special teams/backup guy means he doesn't have the miles on him like Kyle does. Kyle has had a nice year and I wonder if he feels like they're about to turn a corner. I don't think he'll make an immediate decision after the season is over. I think he might wait and see what McBeane do to improve the team and then decide.

[billsfan_34]

On 12/9/2018 at 7:54 PM, CaptnCoke11 said:

Certainly does look bad when you let a team like the Jets move down your throat in key situations 

Not a good day for the entire team but the D stunk for sure

[Billever76]

6 hours ago, blacklabel said:

They can't do it all on their own. Considering some of the lopsided losses they've had this season, it's a big time credit to the players and coaches that they now sit at first in overall yards allowed and first for passing yards allowed. They have created turnover opportunities this season but the ball just hasn't bounced their way like it did in 2017. That first Jets game they forced what, three fumbles and somehow the Jets recovered all of them.

 

I understand they have confidence that their front four will get pressure, but there have been a couple of games now (this last one included) where they didn't generate much pressure and recorded zero sacks and zero hits on Darnold. That's a little bit unacceptable. If you're not getting home with four, switch it up, create some pressure, send five or six, give the kid a real exotic look he'll have a hard time deciphering. They don't have to do these things all the time but it would be nice if they sprinkled some of this stuff into their game plans on the regular. 

 

Very talented young group, though, so, sky's the limit I feel. The only two major contributors they could lose after this season are Kyle and Lorenzo but i wouldn't be surprised if Lorenzo came back. He's really excelled in the role they have him in and he gets to play both off the ball and on it and I believe at this point he is the sack leader on the team. His career as a special teams/backup guy means he doesn't have the miles on him like Kyle does. Kyle has had a nice year and I wonder if he feels like they're about to turn a corner. I don't think he'll make an immediate decision after the season is over. I think he might wait and see what McBeane do to improve the team and then decide.

PREACH!!..but look at who our DC is...Frazier hates to use the blitz..he plays afraid of the big play so he drops everyone back into zone..he tries to look intimidating with his presnap movement and faking blitz before dropping off but very seldom does he rely on the blitz...now if our front 4 get pressure his defense is actually pretty darn stout..but when our front 4 get no pressure the defense ends up breaking..baltimore,chargers,GB, Indianapolis,and this last game....and we lose..now wouldn't you think an NFL defensive coordinator would adjust and call blitz or find ways to get pressure?..go back and watch the games I mentioned above...Frazier kept on rushing 4 dropping everyone back(minus the 2nd half charger game where McDermott admitted to having called the defense)..come back and talk to me after watching those games..then maybe you'll get why I'm a huge advocate of getting rid of Frazier!..it's his inability to make adjustments to get after the QB which means blitzing!..getting pressure on the QB is the biggest need in today's NFL!

[Mr. WEO]

17 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

True for sure but what are you comparing them to? Some fantasy dream?  Go ahead and look at the other defenses this past weekend.

 

I'm comparing them to elite defenses.  Many here are referencing the Jets "average starting field posisiton" as an excuse for the D not getting off the filed.  Yet these were 2 long yardage drives for a total of 20 plays late min the game to give up 2 4th Q leads.

 

17 hours ago, billsfan89 said:

 

One game does not a season make, any defense has bad games where they give up a bad clutch drives. Even the Bears defense (a defense most consider to be the best or among the best) got 30 points hung on them by the Giants with several long clutch drives last week, they also gave up 31 points to the Fins earlier in the year. When analyzing a defense you have to take a look at more than just one or two games. You can argue they are a good but far from elite defense and make a compelling case. However your argument has to be better than well in this one game they stunk. 

 

They got blown out early in the season by the Ravens and the Chargers.  They got blown out by the Colts, allowing Luck 4 TDs on only 156 yards passing, and allowed 220 yards rushing.  Gave up 226 rushing yards to the Jags. 

 

 

[blacklabel]

12 hours ago, Billever76 said:

PREACH!!..but look at who our DC is...Frazier hates to use the blitz..he plays afraid of the big play so he drops everyone back into zone..he tries to look intimidating with his presnap movement and faking blitz before dropping off but very seldom does he rely on the blitz...now if our front 4 get pressure his defense is actually pretty darn stout..but when our front 4 get no pressure the defense ends up breaking..baltimore,chargers,GB, Indianapolis,and this last game....and we lose..now wouldn't you think an NFL defensive coordinator would adjust and call blitz or find ways to get pressure?..go back and watch the games I mentioned above...Frazier kept on rushing 4 dropping everyone back(minus the 2nd half charger game where McDermott admitted to having called the defense)..come back and talk to me after watching those games..then maybe you'll get why I'm a huge advocate of getting rid of Frazier!..it's his inability to make adjustments to get after the QB which means blitzing!..getting pressure on the QB is the biggest need in today's NFL!

 

I hear you. I don't think Frazier is going anywhere, though. McDermott seems like he wants to keep things as consistent as possible. I do think there will be some coaching changes after the season (Crossman) but I don't think Frazier will get switched out. 

 

And just running straight up blitzes play after play isn't the answer either. I mean, yeah, like I said, I'd definitely like to see them switch it up and throw some different kinds of pressure at teams but obviously that can't happen all the time. It's that old saying they like to use, "live by the blitz, die by the blitz." Some QBs love it when a team blitzes, Brady comes to mind, he and any other QBs that can get rid of it fast will pick apart teams that blitz a lot. Doesn't mean I don't think they shouldn't use it, just be creative with it and be smart at the times you call for it. 

 

I recall the Chargers game when McDermott took over. I think he was just trying to provide a spark and he kinda did. The defense was flying around a lot more in the second half than the first but unfortunately the game was kinda already in hand for LA at that point. Hopefully with more time and experience in their scheme, these coaches will start mixing things up a bit more.

[Thurman#1]

On 12/12/2018 at 12:58 AM, LSHMEAB said:

Those are good stats to counter overall time of possession and I'm always ready to accept new data.

 

Nevertheless, the DATA shows that the RZ defense sucks and I'm not buying the "tired" argument as an excuse for that.

 

And I think we all agree that the defense is good. Great they are not.

 

 

Agreed that they aren't great. They're beyond good, though. Somewhere in the vicinity of very very good, IMHO.

 

It'll be very interesting to see how good they can be if the offense and STs can be decent enough next year to leave the defense with, say, average field position and an average rather than well above-average number of drives to face.

 

 

Edited December 13, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

20 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

I'm comparing them to elite defenses.  Many here are referencing the Jets "average starting field posisiton" as an excuse for the D not getting off the filed.  Yet these were 2 long yardage drives for a total of 20 plays late min the game to give up 2 4th Q leads.

 

 

I guess that's one way to put it, if you want to try to spin as much as you can. Yeah, there were two long yardage drives for two TDs late in the game. However, those were the only long-yardage drives for scores in the whole game. How many defenses regularly hold teams to two long scoring drives for the whole game? That's damn good. Even the elite defenses have plenty of games where they allow more than that. And one of those "long-yardage" drives started on the Jets 39. That's pretty good field position as well.

 

And to remind you, those three other Jets scoring drives started on the Bills 8 yard-line (touchdown drive eight yards long), the Bills 46 yard-line (field goal) and the Bills 32 yard-line (field goal).

 

So outside of those three drives, they only allowed two other scoring drives the whole game.

 

Again, that loss was NOT the defense's fault. The reason people are referencing field position is that it was awful, was directly responsible for almost half the points scored against them, and that it is a smart sensible thing to reference in this situation.

 

20 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

They got blown out early in the season by the Ravens and the Chargers.  They got blown out by the Colts, allowing Luck 4 TDs on only 156 yards passing, and allowed 220 yards rushing.  Gave up 226 rushing yards to the Jags. 

 

 

Interesting thing you mention that Colts game. 37 points allowed. Not good. But one Indy TD drive was two yards long. Remember that one, after the fumble? And another was 20 yards long. And another of the Indy TDs went all of eight yards, after an INT.

 

Two TD drives, with a total of twenty-two yards gained by Indy.

 

And then another drive started on the Bills 32 where the D held them to a field goal.

 

The Chargers had drive starts the Buffalo 38 and the Buffalo 16.

 

The Ravens had drive starts on the Buffalo 20, the Buffalo 29, the Buffalo 14 and the Buffalo fricking 1. Jeez it's depressing me to write this.

 

 

Field position matters, bigtime, and this offense has been gifting opponents with some terrific drive starts all year.

 

 

 

[dlonce]

As the poster  Billever76 stated, paraphrasing, when the defense only relies on a 4 man rush we get whipped on.

Our front isn’t good enough to put a lot of pressure on by themselves.

 

It boggles my mind as to why we didn’t throw blitzes at a rookie QB.  We sat back, played zone and tried to do what?

Frasier has done this often,for whatever reason. My guess is it’s McDermott

 

Success has come when we throw blitz packages. 

 

Im tired of McDermott using games to test theories,  “trying different things” Most of what he has

tried has not worked. Stick to what we do best buddy.

Edited December 13, 2018 by dlonce

[Mr. WEO]

4 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

I guess that's one way to put it, if you want to try to spin as much as you can. Yeah, there were two long yardage drives for two TDs late in the game. However, those were the only long-yardage drives for scores in the whole game. How many defenses regularly hold teams to two long scoring drives for the whole game? That's damn good. Even the elite defenses have plenty of games where they allow more than that. And one of those "long-yardage" drives started on the Jets 39. That's pretty good field position as well.

 

And to remind you, those three other Jets scoring drives started on the Bills 8 yard-line (touchdown drive eight yards long), the Bills 46 yard-line (field goal) and the Bills 32 yard-line (field goal).

 

So outside of those three drives, they only allowed two other scoring drives the whole game.

 

Again, that loss was NOT the defense's fault. The reason people are referencing field position is that it was awful, was directly responsible for almost half the points scored against them, and that it is a smart sensible thing to reference in this situation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

 

Look, this wasn't the Chargers or the Chiefs--it was the NYJets.  AND, those "only" 2 long drives resulted in the Bills losing 2 4th Q leads!

 

That's not "damn good".  Even a "good" defense doesn't allow a rookie QB on a mediocre team to march down the field to blow 2 4th Q leads.    You would have to spin logic into a pretzel to conclude otherwise.

[Thurman#1]

23 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

The Bills defense was brutal the first two games and that Colts game. 

 

Throw any stat you want out there, they sucked in all three of those games.

 

 

Throw any opinion you want out there, Scott. They were nowhere near as bad as the stats made them look. The offense and STs gave up handfuls of easy points for our opponents.

 

In the Ravens game, the defense gave up 369 yards. Forced four fumbles but got lucky and only recovered one. That ain't great, for sure, but it also doesn't suck, particularly when you look at how the Bills offense did. Now, that was some suckage. 153 total offensive yards. That leaves juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust a bit of a burden on the defense.

 

Here's how the Bills offense performed, drive by drive:

 

3 plays punt

3 plays punt

3 plays punt

4 plays punt

4 plays missed field goal

3 plays INT

3 plays punt

5 plays turnover on downs

3 plays INT

3 plays punt

12 plays field goal

6 plays punt

3 plays punt

 

Now, the Ravens offense drive by drive:

 

 

Drive start BAL 20, 10 play 80 yard drive, TD (Bills D was bad)

Drive start BAL 25, 3 play 1 yard drive, punt (Good)

Drive start BAL 34, 10 play 66 yard drive, TD (Bad)

Drive start BUF 25, 3 play -3 yard drive, FG (Excellent)

Drive start BAL 30, 4 play 0 yard drive, fumble (Excellent)

Drive start BAL 42, 3 play 13 yard drive, punt (Good)

Drive start BUF 29, 4 play 8 yard drive, FG (Excellent)

Drive start BAL 15, 9 play 85 yard drive, TD (Bad)

Drive start BUF 14, 3 play 14 yard drive, TD (Not good, but  certainly not the D's fault)

Drive start BUF 1, 1 play 1 yard drive, TD (Not their fault)

Drive start BAL 30, 3 plays, punt (Good)

Drive start BAL 25, 6 plays, 16 yards, punt (Good)

Drive start BAL 11,13 plays, 94 yards TD (Very Bad)

Drive start BAL 10, 3 plays, 7 yards, punt (Good)

 

That sure isn't good, but nowhere near as bad as you'd think if you just saw the score. The offense and STs let them down in every single way, including letting Baltimore keep the defense constantly on the field, grind them down and exhaust them.

 

By far their worst game, probably, and not that horrible.

 

 

 

 

And again, you guys pointing only at the few worst games. Somehow you never mention the ones that were outstanding. You make evaluations like this on the body of work of a whole season. Every team and every unit has a bad game or two or three.

 

 

 

Edited December 14, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

17 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?

 

Look, this wasn't the Chargers or the Chiefs--it was the NYJets.  AND, those "only" 2 long drives resulted in the Bills losing 2 4th Q leads!

 

That's not "damn good".  Even a "good" defense doesn't allow a rookie QB on a mediocre team to march down the field to blow 2 4th Q leads.    You would have to spin logic into a pretzel to conclude otherwise.

 

 

 

 

If Mrs. Lincoln had been able to get her head together, she'd say, "You know, the production wasn't the problem." Same as the defense wasn't the problem here.

 

Sorry, you're still missing the point. Fourteen points, your two drives, is NOT a lot. It just isn't. And it was fourteen points over the whole game The absolute most elite defenses in the league allow two TD drives more than they don't. (And it's about time we quit with the "two long TD drives *****," it was one long TD drive and one medium-length drive that started in good field position at the 39, far beyond the NFL's average drive start). The Bills D allowed 248 yards. They weren't where it all went wrong.

 

As for your little obsession with 4th quarter TDs, remind me ... do they give you ten points for 4th quarter TDs and only 4 points for them if they come earlier? Or do you get the same number of points no matter when you cross the goal line? When a TD comes is entirely irrelevant. The question is only how many were allowed. And in the case of the Jets game, they allowed one long drive, one 39-yarder and three scoring drives when the offense and STs gave the Jets the ball at the Bills 8 (TD), the Bills 46 (FG) and the Bills 32 (FG).

 

You keep arguing that allowing two "long" drives to a rookie QB on a mediocre team rules you out. Well, I guess that means the Vikings D isn't good. They also allowed two drives of about the same lengths to Darnold and the Jets. The whole idea that there's some one thing that really good defenses never do is just stupid, but making the threshold as low as two long drives is utterly ridiculous. Excellent defense have bad games. They just don't do it very often. Look at the Ravens. Are they damn good? Of course they are and yet they allowed 36 points to the Panthers despite only one Panthers drive start in Ravens territory.

 

Look at the Bears allowing 31 to the Dolphins and 38 to the Patriots and 30 to the Giants. Even very good units have bad days.

 

No, the Jets game wasn't damn good. But the argument isn't about one game. It's about the season. And yes, over the season, this defense has absolutely, without question, been "damn good." Not great. But yeah, damn good.

Edited December 14, 2018 by Thurman#1

[row_33]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

If Mrs. Lincoln had been able to get her head together, she'd say, "You know, the production wasn't the problem." Same as the defense wasn't the problem here.

 

Sorry, you're still missing the point. Fourteen points, your two drives, is NOT a lot. It just isn't. And it was fourteen points over the whole game The absolute most elite defenses in the league allow two TD drives more than they don't. (And it's about time we quit with the "two long TD drives *****," it was one long TD drive and one medium-length drive that started in good field position at the 39, far beyond the NFL's average drive start). The Bills D allowed 248 yards. They weren't where it all went wrong.

 

As for your little obsession with 4th quarter TDs, remind me ... do they give you ten points for 4th quarter TDs and only 4 points for them if they come earlier? Or do you get the same number of points no matter when you cross the goal line? When a TD comes is entirely irrelevant. The question is only how many were allowed. And in the case of the Jets game, they allowed one long drive, one 39-yarder and three scoring drives when the offense and STs gave the Jets the ball at the Bills 8 (TD), the Bills 46 (FG) and the Bills 32 (FG).

 

You keep arguing that allowing two "long" drives to a rookie QB on a mediocre team rules you out. Well, I guess that means the Vikings D isn't good. They also allowed two drives of about the same lengths to Darnold and the Jets. The whole idea that there's some one thing that really good defenses never do is just stupid, but making the threshold as low as two long drives is utterly ridiculous. Excellent defense have bad games. They just don't do it very often. Look at the Ravens. Are they damn good? Of course they are and yet they allowed 36 points to the Panthers despite only one Panthers drive start in Ravens territory.

 

Look at the Bears allowing 31 to the Dolphins and 38 to the Patriots and 30 to the Giants. Even very good units have bad days.

 

No, the Jets game wasn't damn good. But the argument isn't about one game. It's about the season. And yes, over the season, this defense has absolutely, without question, been "damn good." Not great. But yeah, damn good.

 

Its a 4-9 team, in a season overrun with very very mediocre teams 

 

nothing to gloat about at all

 

 

 

 

[Thurman#1]

1 hour ago, row_33 said:

 

Its a 4-9 team, in a season overrun with very very mediocre teams 

 

nothing to gloat about at all

 

 

 

The team, yeah. No disagreement.

 

We're talking about the defense only, though. I'm pretty clear, as are pretty much all of us I think, that the offense and the STs aren't exactly dominating.

 

Wins are a team stat, not a defense stat.

Edited December 14, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Mr. WEO]

4 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

If Mrs. Lincoln had been able to get her head together, she'd say, "You know, the production wasn't the problem." Same as the defense wasn't the problem here.

 

Sorry, you're still missing the point. Fourteen points, your two drives, is NOT a lot. It just isn't. And it was fourteen points over the whole game The absolute most elite defenses in the league allow two TD drives more than they don't. (And it's about time we quit with the "two long TD drives *****," it was one long TD drive and one medium-length drive that started in good field position at the 39, far beyond the NFL's average drive start). The Bills D allowed 248 yards. They weren't where it all went wrong.

 

As for your little obsession with 4th quarter TDs, remind me ... do they give you ten points for 4th quarter TDs and only 4 points for them if they come earlier? Or do you get the same number of points no matter when you cross the goal line? When a TD comes is entirely irrelevant. The question is only how many were allowed. And in the case of the Jets game, they allowed one long drive, one 39-yarder and three scoring drives when the offense and STs gave the Jets the ball at the Bills 8 (TD), the Bills 46 (FG) and the Bills 32 (FG).

 

You keep arguing that allowing two "long" drives to a rookie QB on a mediocre team rules you out. Well, I guess that means the Vikings D isn't good. They also allowed two drives of about the same lengths to Darnold and the Jets. The whole idea that there's some one thing that really good defenses never do is just stupid, but making the threshold as low as two long drives is utterly ridiculous. Excellent defense have bad games. They just don't do it very often. Look at the Ravens. Are they damn good? Of course they are and yet they allowed 36 points to the Panthers despite only one Panthers drive start in Ravens territory.

 

Look at the Bears allowing 31 to the Dolphins and 38 to the Patriots and 30 to the Giants. Even very good units have bad days.

 

No, the Jets game wasn't damn good. But the argument isn't about one game. It's about the season. And yes, over the season, this defense has absolutely, without question, been "damn good." Not great. But yeah, damn good.

 

 

It was 2 4th Q TDs--each of which erased a Bills lead.  It doesn't matter what they did the rest of the game.  By the way it was not a "39 yarder"---that drive started at the JETS 39 yard line.

 

That's the only point being made and it's an easy one to make.  When the time came (twice) to get off the field to preserve a win in the 4th Q, the Defense allowed 20 plays, 146 yards and 14 points to happen. 

[The Now Moment]

Overrated by many on this board absolutely.  For some reason, a lot of fans look at yards and think that defines a defense.  There are so many factors that play into a great defense.  The defense is good and has a lot of potential moving forward.  

[Thurman#1]

15 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Not sure what those stats are supposed to tell me? 

 

I saw the games. 

 

The were bad in the Raven, Chargers(first half), and Colts game.

 

Agreed the offense didn't help them but independent of the offense, they were bad in those games.

 

They are a solid solid unit overall with some inconsistencies. Those inconsistencies could be fixed with another pass rusher opposite Hughes and Edmunds to stop ***** up game in and game out. 

 

 

You saw the games. And you still don't understand what those stats are supposed to tell you? Jeez. Well, I thought I'd already said that in my last paragraph of nearly every post I've written in this thread, but maybe I didn't say it well enough. Fair enough, I guess. I'll try it again.

 

What those stats should tell you - about this game in particular and the season in general is this - that the phrase you used there ... "independent of the offence" is something that simply doesn't exist. Defences depend heavily on offences and offences depend heavily on defences. Sucky defences greatly impair the performance of even very good defences and in the Bills case ... vice versa and even more so. When you look at those stats and see that the average defence faces 10.9 drives per game and the Bills offence stayed on the field so poorly that the Bills defence that game faced 14 drives, that out of the 13 drives the Bills offence had they managed 8/13 three-and-outs, and 11/13 drives lasting five plays or less ... and 1/13 total drive lasting more than six plays, you ought to understand that the defence was exhausted and handicapped. When you further see the Ravens started four drives inside of the Bills 29 yard line, you should understand that the offence was putting that exhausted defence in untenable situations continuously.

 

There's a reason they've allowed fewer yards than anyone else in the league. And that reason is very very simple. They're good. They're very good indeed. And over the course of the season they've proved that. No, they're not great. But damn good, yeah.

 

Could they improve with another pass rusher? Sure. That and some time to develop this very young group. You're not wrong. But they're already very good.

 

The best defences have games that aren't good. You can check the record. That's how it is. The ***** '85 Bears defence allowed 38 points to the Dolphins and 28 to the 2-14 Bucs. The question ... for the eighty-millionth time in this thread alone ... is how a defence does over the season. The Bills D has been damn good over the season.

Edited December 15, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

16 hours ago, Buffalo30 said:

Overrated by many on this board absolutely.  For some reason, a lot of fans look at yards and think that defines a defense.  There are so many factors that play into a great defense.  The defense is good and has a lot of potential moving forward.  

 

 

They look at yards because it's how the NFL ranks defences. And for good reason.

 

Yards are best way to isolate the offence from the defence and vice versa.

 

Does it tell the whole story? No. Is it the one stat that best tells the story by itself? Yup. There is more to it but if you're going to look at one stat, that should be the one you look at.

 

Here are the top ten defences, as ranked by yards allowed:

 

1) Bills

2) Ravens

3) Bears

4) Cowboys

5) Vikes

6) Jags

7) Chargers

? Steelers

9) Titans

10) 49ers

 

Leaving out any discussion of the Bills entirely, is that a pretty good list of the best Ds? Are there any teams listed in the top five (leaving out the Bills, so the Ravens, Bears, Cowboys, Vikes and Jags) that don't absolutely belong there? Ranking teams by yards allowed produces a pretty good list of good defences, for exactly the obvious reason. Not a perfect list. But pretty damn good.

 

No, the Bills aren't the best in the league. But they absolutely belong in this group of ten. And not in the bottom two or three of it.

 

 

Edited December 15, 2018 by Thurman#1

[Richard Noggin]

On 12/9/2018 at 8:06 PM, Rufridr101 said:

tremaine Edmunds is not a middle linebacker he's an outside linebacker. Hopefully they put him in Milano's spot to finish the year.

 

Lorenzo Alexander for MLB!!! He did it in the playoff game last year. He is a beast.

[Richard Noggin]

17 hours ago, ScottLaw said:

Not sure what those stats are supposed to tell me? 

 

I saw the games. 

 

The were bad in the Raven, Chargers(first half), and Colts game.

 

Agreed the offense didn't help them but independent of the offense, they were bad in those games.

 

They are a solid solid unit overall with some inconsistencies. Those inconsistencies could be fixed with another pass rusher opposite Hughes and Edmunds to stop ***** up game in and game out. 

 

That's reasonable. I haven't always found your analysis to be reasonable. But here you're being fair. "Those inconsistencies" were mostly fixed in every other game, oddly enough. But you're right: we've watched several BAD games of defense this season. Very bad games. Which has simply revealed that the 2018 Bills don't have an offense capable of 'picking up' the defense in a given week. 

 

No NFL defense is consistently shut-down anymore. Flashes, sure. But offense is the only somewhat-reliable phase of the game now.

[Richard Noggin]

On 12/13/2018 at 7:22 AM, dlonce said:

As the poster  Billever76 stated, paraphrasing, when the defense only relies on a 4 man rush we get whipped on.

Our front isn’t good enough to put a lot of pressure on by themselves.

 

It boggles my mind as to why we didn’t throw blitzes at a rookie QB.  We sat back, played zone and tried to do what?

Frasier has done this often,for whatever reason. My guess is it’s McDermott

 

Success has come when we throw blitz packages. 

 

Im tired of McDermott using games to test theories,  “trying different things” Most of what he has

tried has not worked. Stick to what we do best buddy.

 

It seems as though Frazier got too hung up on 4-man rushes early this year, and McDermott stepped in to infuse the play-calling with more creative/aggressive pressure packages. 

 

That appears to have mostly helped (except against the Colts and Packers, especially). But yeah, against the Colts, in particular, it looks like (and sounds like in post-game interviews) they'd gone back to the more passive Tampa-based, 4-man-only pass-rush games (twists and stunts and zone drops), which can be gashed and slashed on the ground, and exploited in play-action. 

 

Lately it feels like the D has gone back to those less aggressive pressure concepts that spell doom against teams who can also run the ball.

 

If we don't affect the QB,

we don't play good D. 

[BobbyC81]

On 12/9/2018 at 5:14 PM, ScottLaw said:

No pass rush.

 

Too much McJauron ball. Need to end this as Allen gets better and more experience.

 

Did McDermott/Frazier ever explain why they didn’t blitz to get a pass rush?

[The Now Moment]

18 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

They look at yards because it's how the NFL ranks defences. And for good reason.

 

Yards are best way to isolate the offence from the defence and vice versa.

 

Does it tell the whole story? No. Is it the one stat that best tells the story by itself? Yup. There is more to it but if you're going to look at one stat, that should be the one you look at.

 

Here are the top ten defences, as ranked by yards allowed:

 

1) Bills

2) Ravens

3) Bears

4) Cowboys

5) Vikes

6) Jags

7) Chargers

? Steelers

9) Titans

10) 49ers

 

Leaving out any discussion of the Bills entirely, is that a pretty good list of the best Ds? Are there any teams listed in the top five (leaving out the Bills, so the Ravens, Bears, Cowboys, Vikes and Jags) that don't absolutely belong there? Ranking teams by yards allowed produces a pretty good list of good defences, for exactly the obvious reason. Not a perfect list. But pretty damn good.

 

No, the Bills aren't the best in the league. But they absolutely belong in this group of ten. And not in the bottom two or three of it.

 

 

I think they are a very good defense but they still have things to work on.  They have been put in plenty of bad positions by the offense and special teams too.