John Warrow’s High Praise For Beane & McDermott Regime

[dave mcbride]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

The differential was skewed by a couple games where they got blown out.  The NFL measures success and failure by wins and losses, not point differentials.  That said, the blowouts need to stop because it's more a reflection on coaching ability and ability to make in game corrections.

The blowout situation was terrible last season. In the first 9 games, they were basically blown out 6 times (the Chargers game was a blowout despite the final 31-20 score; the Chargers were up 28-3 and the rest was garbage time). That was about as bad as I've ever seen the Bills. That said, they didn't suffer any true blowout losses in their final 7 games, although I wouldn't argue with anyone who said their final 24-12 loss to the Pats was a blowout. They score in the final seconds to make it look reasonably respectable, but they were steamrolled in that game. 

Edited June 25, 2019 by dave mcbride

[LSHMEAB]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

And they felt like they had to get to 10 for a very good reason. Sean Payton loved him and was taking him at #11 if he got there.

So you mean to tell me two of the most accomplished offensive minds loved Mahomes, but NOBODY could see it coming? Almost like the top guys see things other's don't. Weird.

[eball]

51 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The blowout situation was terrible last season. In the first 9 games, they were basically blown out 6 times (the Chargers game was a blowout despite the final 31-20 score; the Chargers were up 28-3 and the rest was garbage time). That was about as I've ever seen the Bills. That said, they didn't suffer any true blowout losses in their final 7 games, although I wouldn't argue with anyone who said their final 24-12 loss to the Pats was a blowout. They score in the final seconds to make it look reasonably respectable, but they were steamrolled in that game. 

 

The blowouts last year were the result of an offense featuring Peterman, raw Josh, and DA -- with Benjamin as the #1 WR.  The game vs. Chicago at home (Peterman's last start) was the first Bills game I made no effort to watch live in as long as I can remember.

 

Absent some pretty crazy stuff happening I just can't see that sort of ineptitude returning.

[K-9]

Despite the points differential, the Bills’ underlying defensive metrics are stellar and while I wouldn’t say we have a dominant defense, we have one on the upswing that can contend. 

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

The differential was skewed by a couple games where they got blown out.  The NFL measures success and failure by wins and losses, not point differentials.  That said, the blowouts need to stop because it's more a reflection on coaching ability and ability to make in game corrections.

 

Bills 2018 season says differently.   The Bills lost 47-3 to the Ravens, 22-0 to the Packers, 37-5 to the Colts, 25-6 to the Pats, and 41-9 to the Bears.     That's a -149 point differential in 5 losses (-28.9/ game).  The Chargers were up 28-6 at the half and coasted the rest of the game to win by "only" 11 points.  The Bills were down 24-6 to the Pats in the second game when Allen threw a TD to Jones with about a minute remaining to cut the losing margin to "only" 12 points.   The Bills only had 3 "close" losses in 2018: 20-13 to the Texans with Watson playing with a partially collapsed lung, and to fellow bottom feeders the Dolphins (21-17)  and Jets (27-23). 

 

 

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Bills 2018 season says differently.   The Bills lost 47-3 to the Ravens, 22-0 to the Packers, 37-5 to the Colts, 25-6 to the Pats, and 41-9 to the Bears.     That's a -149 point differential in 5 losses (-28.9/ game).  The Chargers were up 28-6 at the half and coasted the rest of the game to win by "only" 11 points.  The Bills were down 24-6 to the Pats in the second game when Allen threw a TD to Jones with about a minute remaining to cut the losing margin to "only" 12 points.   The Bills only had 3 "close" losses in 2018: 20-13 to the Texans with Watson playing with a partially collapsed lung, and to fellow bottom feeders the Dolphins (21-17)  and Jets (27-23). 

 

 

A couple was used in a general sense, and I indicated the blowouts concern me as far as coaching.  And like it or not the league measures wins and losses.  Anything else?

[thebandit27]

4 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Bills 2018 season says differently.   The Bills lost 47-3 to the Ravens, 22-0 to the Packers, 37-5 to the Colts, 25-6 to the Pats, and 41-9 to the Bears.     That's a -149 point differential in 5 losses (-28.9/ game).  The Chargers were up 28-6 at the half and coasted the rest of the game to win by "only" 11 points.  The Bills were down 24-6 to the Pats in the second game when Allen threw a TD to Jones with about a minute remaining to cut the losing margin to "only" 12 points.   The Bills only had 3 "close" losses in 2018: 20-13 to the Texans with Watson playing with a partially collapsed lung, and to fellow bottom feeders the Dolphins (21-17)  and Jets (27-23). 

 

 

 

I've seen this repeated a few times in this thread, and I wonder why.

 

Just going purely off of play selection, their play-calling didn't change at all in the 2nd half.  They called 13 passes to 9 runs (this removes penalty-negated plays, a fumbled snap, and a kneel-down at the end), and their first 2 drives opened with pass attempts to Keenan Allen. Their play selection in the first half was 17 pass attempts to 15 runs.

 

There's almost no indication that they took their collective foot off the gas.

[Royale with Cheese]

13 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Bills 2018 season says differently.   The Bills lost 47-3 to the Ravens, 22-0 to the Packers, 37-5 to the Colts, 25-6 to the Pats, and 41-9 to the Bears.     That's a -149 point differential in 5 losses (-28.9/ game).  The Chargers were up 28-6 at the half and coasted the rest of the game to win by "only" 11 points.  The Bills were down 24-6 to the Pats in the second game when Allen threw a TD to Jones with about a minute remaining to cut the losing margin to "only" 12 points.   The Bills only had 3 "close" losses in 2018: 20-13 to the Texans with Watson playing with a partially collapsed lung, and to fellow bottom feeders the Dolphins (21-17)  and Jets (27-23). 

 

 

 

LOL....

Watson suffered the collapsed lung the week before against the Cowboys.  And guess what?  In that game, he was 33-44 passing, 375 yards, 8.5 average and a 75% completion percentage.  The Bills confused him all day and had a rough outing.

 

You will go to any lengths to discredit the Bills.  Even change your arguments to make it fit LOL.

[SoTier]

24 minutes ago, K-9 said:

Despite the points differential, the Bills’ underlying defensive metrics are stellar and while I wouldn’t say we have a dominant defense, we have one on the upswing that can contend. 

 

This is simply untrue.  The Bills were last in Red Zone defense.  They were 18th in scoring defense. They were 16th in rushing defense.  They were 26th in sacks.  Their 2nd ranking for total yards was at least partly a result of the short fields they gave opponents.  Their 1st ranking in passing yards was also slanted because opponents had short fields and didn't have to throw as much because they had big leads. 

 

The Bills defense was decent, probably somewhat above average, but it's got to get a lot better in the Red Zone and against the run to be good enough for the team to contend because they don't have enough talent on offense to win many shoot outs, especially with the top teams.

[Gugny]

Is this officially the "Never Ending Thread 3.0 ?"

 

[Royale with Cheese]

10 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This is simply untrue.  The Bills were last in Red Zone defense.  They were 18th in scoring defense. They were 16th in rushing defense.  They were 26th in sacks.  Their 2nd ranking for total yards was at least partly a result of the short fields they gave opponents.  Their 1st ranking in passing yards was also slanted because opponents had short fields and didn't have to throw as much because they had big leads. 

 

The Bills defense was decent, probably somewhat above average, but it's got to get a lot better in the Red Zone and against the run to be good enough for the team to contend because they don't have enough talent on offense to win many shoot outs, especially with the top teams.

 

LOL again.  

 

On Defense: 

 

The Bills were #2 in average yards per drive.   #10 on points per drive.  #9 in time of possession per drive.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestatsdef2018

 

The Bills were also 8th in the league in 3rd down defense.  

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/downs/sort/thirdDownConvPct/position/defense

[dave mcbride]

31 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

I've seen this repeated a few times in this thread, and I wonder why.

 

Just going purely off of play selection, their play-calling didn't change at all in the 2nd half.  They called 13 passes to 9 runs (this removes penalty-negated plays, a fumbled snap, and a kneel-down at the end), and their first 2 drives opened with pass attempts to Keenan Allen. Their play selection in the first half was 17 pass attempts to 15 runs.

 

There's almost no indication that they took their collective foot off the gas.

I don't think playcalling selection correlates with intensity. That game was a complete joke by halftime, and the Chargers knew it. 

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

LOL again.  

 

On Defense: 

 

The Bills were #2 in average yards per drive.   #10 on points per drive.  #9 in time of possession per drive.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/drivestatsdef2018

 

The Bills were also 8th in the league in 3rd down defense.  

http://www.espn.com/nfl/statistics/team/_/stat/downs/sort/thirdDownConvPct/position/defense

They were first in yards per drive allowed and first in plays per drive allowed. They were 32nd in drive start, which means that against the Bills, opposing offenses had the shortest fields to traverse in the entire league. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/2018.htm. 

[K-9]

2 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This is simply untrue.  The Bills were last in Red Zone defense.  They were 18th in scoring defense. They were 16th in rushing defense.  They were 26th in sacks.  Their 2nd ranking for total yards was at least partly a result of the short fields they gave opponents.  Their 1st ranking in passing yards was also slanted because opponents had short fields and didn't have to throw as much because they had big leads. 

 

The Bills defense was decent, probably somewhat above average, but it's got to get a lot better in the Red Zone and against the run to be good enough for the team to contend because they don't have enough talent on offense to win many shoot outs, especially with the top teams.

As usual, it’s a matter of opinion and I suspect you’re basing much of that on gross yardage. But that’s not what coaches and pro scouts focus on when evaluating opponents. The key underlying metrics for coaches that give them the most context when evaluating defenses are number of rushing attempts against, average per rush against,  average per pass against,  average per play against, and QB rating against. In short, it’s a snapshot of how a defense does on a play to play basis. 

 

We are poor in the number of rushes given up at 9th worst in the league. That and our red zone softness that you alluded to are why I said we aren’t a dominant defense. Even still, for all the rushing attempts given up, we finished a respectable 9th in average per attempt against.

 

All the other metrics clearly show we are among the better defenses in the league, either first, second, or third. Play with more leads, especially later in games, and I expect that rush attempts against to get better. Fix our red zone defense as well, and we will go from good to dominant. 

14 minutes ago, Gugny said:

Is this officially the "Never Ending Thread 3.0 ?"

 

Gotta get to a hundred, Gugny. 

[Royale with Cheese]

5 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

I don't think playcalling selection correlates with intensity. That game was a complete joke by halftime, and the Chargers knew it. 

They were first in yards per drive allowed and first in plays per drive allowed. They were 32nd in drive start, which means that against the Bills, opposing offenses had the shortest fields to traverse in the entire league. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/2018.htm. 

 

Yes I know....but it's a 6 yard difference between first and last.  Over the course of a game with 70+ offensive plays, I don't think that makes a huge difference.

I would rather have that 6 yards than not but that's not something that keeps me up at night.  

So lets say that's a big deal then.  Well doesn't that make our defense actually look better since we were in the middle of the pack in scoring defense?  Worst field position but not worst scoring defense?

[BADOLBILZ]

15 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This is simply untrue.  The Bills were last in Red Zone defense.  They were 18th in scoring defense. They were 16th in rushing defense.  They were 26th in sacks.  Their 2nd ranking for total yards was at least partly a result of the short fields they gave opponents.  Their 1st ranking in passing yards was also slanted because opponents had short fields and didn't have to throw as much because they had big leads. 

 

 

?

 

Need to make a lot more plays in backfield and for the DT1T and MLB to be much more efficient against the run.

[dave mcbride]

16 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Yes I know....but it's a 6 yard difference between first and last.  Over the course of a game with 70+ offensive plays, I don't think that makes a huge difference.

I would rather have that 6 yards than not but that's not something that keeps me up at night.  

So lets say that's a big deal then.  Well doesn't that make our defense actually look better since we were in the middle of the pack in scoring defense?  Worst field position but not worst scoring defense?

No argument from me! I thought the defense was really good. Bear in mind that our offense was 26th in TOP. That matters too.

51 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

This is simply untrue.  The Bills were last in Red Zone defense.  They were 18th in scoring defense. They were 16th in rushing defense.  They were 26th in sacks.  Their 2nd ranking for total yards was at least partly a result of the short fields they gave opponents.  Their 1st ranking in passing yards was also slanted because opponents had short fields and didn't have to throw as much because they had big leads. 

 

The Bills defense was decent, probably somewhat above average, but it's got to get a lot better in the Red Zone and against the run to be good enough for the team to contend because they don't have enough talent on offense to win many shoot outs, especially with the top teams.

Not really. Opposing QBs had a collective passer rating of 82.6 vs the Bills (very low), which made them the third best pass defense in the league after the Bears and the Ravens. The reason their pass defense numbers were good is because they actually had a really good pass defense. Nothing more and nothing less. 

Edited June 25, 2019 by dave mcbride

[GunnerBill]

18 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

?

 

Need to make a lot more plays in backfield and for the DT1T and MLB to be much more efficient against the run.

 

I think Star and improvement in the fundamentals of Edmunds are key. Stop the run it will naturally create more opportunities to get into the backfield and make plays. Oliver's pure talent will help too. 

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

The differential was skewed by a couple games where they got blown out.  The NFL measures success and failure by wins and losses, not point differentials.  That said, the blowouts need to stop because it's more a reflection on coaching ability and ability to make in game corrections.

I think the blowouts reflect a bigger problem than you say.   It's unusual, I'd say very unusual for a supposedly solid team, a team that may be building but is fundamentally sound, to get blownout more than once or twice in a season.   You're not fundamentally sound if you're getting beaten badly for more than a quarter of the season.  Jauron couldn't win enough, but he didn't let games get away from him.   (And, by the way, I agree that the Pats game late in the season was a blowout in a sense.   The Pats were in control, everyone knew it.   That shouldn't happen, at least not very often.   I remember when the Saints came to Buffalo 8 or 10 years ago and shut down the Bills.  One of their coaches or players said after the game something like "We could have played another two hours and they (the Bills) wouldn't have scored on us.")

 

In his second season, McDermott should have had a team on the field that knew what it was doing well enough not to get dominated more than two or three times.   In fact, I think he had the players.   Not to win 10, but to be in just about all games and to find a way to win seven or eight.  Maybe it was poor scouting, maybe it was poor game planning by coordinators.   I say this I guess because there were other games where the Bills were well prepared and the players fought and executed and still maybe lost, but didn't look lost on the field.   That tells me they players were good enough to compete, and the coaches let them down.   That's why I was happy to see McD make some changes.   Something was missing.   

 

And that really is my concern for the future.  Despite the whole debate here about where they are and how they got here, I like the players.   I like them now, and I like the fact that the overall talent on the team will get even better in 2020.   What troubles me is whether these coaches, and ultimately whether McDermott, can get athletes to be competitive every week, athletes who are physically good enough to compete.   Somebody clearly wasn't getting that job done from week to week in 2018, as demonstrated by the blowouts.  

[Shaw66]

40 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

Opposing QBs had a collective passer rating of 82.6 vs the Bills (very low), which made them the third best pass defense in the league after the Bears and the Ravens. The reason their pass defense numbers were good is because they actually had a really good pass defense. Nothing more and nothing less. 

I watch a lot, but I'm not expert in Xs and Os.  But I'll say this:

 

I think McD's defensive thinking is WAY ahead of his offensive thinking.   I'd guess that McDermott spends a lot of off-season time studying offense, because he knows that's where this team needs more leadership.  

 

This point about the pass defense is a good example.   I don't know the details of what the Bills play back there, but it's been obvious for the whole defensive back seven last season and at least for the safeties the past two seasons, that they've been give a defense that is difficult to throw against and that they've gotten very good at executing it.   Guys rarely get beaten badly.  Receivers rarely have a lot of open field after the catch.   I admire it, because Belichick's back seven have been like that for a long time.   I don't know if the fundamentals of the D are the same or different, but I know the results in Buffalo look a lot like results in NE.   The pass defense just doesn't give you a lot. 

 

Obviously, the Bills have shown more or less no offensive mastery like the pass defense.   The question is whether McDermott can develop the knowledge and leadership skills to help Daboll get that kind of excellence out of the offense.  

 

[K-9]

3 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I watch a lot, but I'm not expert in Xs and Os.  But I'll say this:

 

I think McD's defensive thinking is WAY ahead of his offensive thinking.   I'd guess that McDermott spends a lot of off-season time studying offense, because he knows that's where this team needs more leadership.  

 

This point about the pass defense is a good example.   I don't know the details of what the Bills play back there, but it's been obvious for the whole defensive back seven last season and at least for the safeties the past two seasons, that they've been give a defense that is difficult to throw against and that they've gotten very good at executing it.   Guys rarely get beaten badly.  Receivers rarely have a lot of open field after the catch.   I admire it, because Belichick's back seven have been like that for a long time.   I don't know if the fundamentals of the D are the same or different, but I know the results in Buffalo look a lot like results in NE.   The pass defense just doesn't give you a lot. 

 

Obviously, the Bills have shown more or less no offensive mastery like the pass defense.   The question is whether McDermott can develop the knowledge and leadership skills to help Daboll get that kind of excellence out of the offense.  

 

Schematically, I think Daboll is on the right track in that regard. But as always, it comes down to personnel and execution. We will start getting an idea on the former soon enough and, if the personnel is there, the execution should soon follow as they get mores and more reps as a unit together. That may take a little more time.