How much is cole beasly really loving the bills?

[stinky finger]

On 6/23/2019 at 10:13 AM, CincyBillsFan said:

Wow a thread about Beasley loving Buffalo sure turned negative real quick.  Some thoughts:

 

*  It's obvious Beasley loves the Bills organization and thinks it's a lot better then Dallas was - that's pretty much all he's talked about. 

 

*  I have to believe Beasley asked around concerning Allen especially given that his stated #1 reason for leaving the Cowboys was that he wanted to get targeted more and catch more passes.  If he thought Allen was a total bust that couldn't complete a short pass I'm not sure the money alone would have been enough to lure him here.  At MINIMUM Beasley must have some confidence that Allen can get him the ball.

 

*  I'm going to ignore the "Allen is inaccurate" statements that are made as if they are FACT.  That argument has been made so much on 2BD that the dead horses bones have been ground into dust.

 

*  I will point out that structurally the Bills are designed for a slot receiver with Beasley's skills to shine.  You have SPEED which MUST be respected with Brown & Foster at the wide outs and a QB in Allen who can get them the ball deep.  Then you have a QB whose running ability is game changing.  This means that LB's and safeties will be a bit preoccupied every time Allen drops back to pass.  Beasley is savvy enough to exploit the inevitable defensive indecision here.

 

*  I believe that not only will Beasley surpass his single season catch numbers at Dallas he will have a surprisingly high average gain per pass catch.  Why?  because his YAC will be enormous as he runs free between the deep coverage worried about Foster/Brown and the underneath coverage worried about Allen taking off.  

 

*  Folks keep claiming they watched & reviewed the tape and saw all these bad short throws by Allen.  Well I don't believe you.  Why?  Because in the game against the Jets you guys were the same ones who tried to convince us that the short Allen throw to Clay, which would have resulted in a huge gain if completed, was at his feet.  When we went back & forth arguing from memory someone posted the actual replay and it was OBVIOUS the ball hit Clay between his stomach & chest yet you guys kept insisting it was a bad throw!  Sure you stopped saying it hit Clay's feet and moved up the anatomy first to his ankles then to his knees but it was clear where Allen hit the guy with his throw.  Finally I think you guys just claimed he threw it to hard!  

 

*  In fact as I think back to some of the biggest pass plays Allen made they were off accurate SHORT passes in which the receiver got free as a result of an Allen scramble. The 3 that come to mind off the top of my head are the pass to Ivory against Minnesota; the pass to McCoy against Houston and the pass to Ivory against Miami in the last game. 

 

Outstanding post! ?

[Ronin]

33 minutes ago, billspro said:

 

He needs to take more short throws, no argument there. The Bills had the worst WR core in the league last year. There are advanced WR stats showing their separation in the bottom 5. Were there plays they were open? sure. Did Allen look for the homerun ball far too often? Yes. That will be one of the easiest things to fix, especially when you add a WR like Beasley. Really all Allen needs to do is take the short throws the defence is giving him and he will become an elite QB, he has all the talent in the world. 

 

I don't know about that.  Bottom 5 isn't "worst." 

 

I disagree on Allen looking for the homerun ball being easiest to fix.  That's a heavy-duty mental thing that I think is going to take a whole lot more work and ingenuity to correct that you and many others seem to think it will.  

 

I'll say it again, the WRs we had last season that were in the spots where Beasley will be this season, were invisible to Allen last year.  The areas where Beasley has traditionally "buttered his bread" are Allens weakest areas.   As you  can see from that video, guys were open in those spots, so it clearly had nothing to do with guys not being open exclusively, maybe on some plays, but hardly as a rule as the existing narrative goes.  

 

So how does one corredt that?  It's obviously not by signing a WR that's going to be open in those same spots.  Has more, everything, to do with the QB involved.  That's not nearly as easy as everyone seems to think or as trivially corrected as they're all saying.  

 

Look at Allen's splits sometime.  On 2nd-and-4-6 and 3rd-and-4-6 he was horrid, going a combined 22 of 48 (45.8%) which is flat out awful.  It's no better on 2nd-and-7-9 and 3rd-and-7-9 where he was a combined 22 of 46 (47.8%).  

 

Allen was only good on 1st-n-10, and 2nd-n-10+.  That's it.  Other than in those two situations he was 77 for 157 (49.0%), for 878 Yards (5.59 YPA), 3 TDs (one every 52 throws), 7 INTs (one every 22 throws), with a rating below 50.  

 

And while I'm going to be guilty of oversimplification here, Beasley's going to be more in the role with the above.  

 

Either way, and getting back to your "worst WRs" comment, which is a ubiquitous narrative here, I have a very difficult time believing that our WRs were unquestionably worse than every other team.  Did you look at who the other teams had?  

 

Jax:  Dede Westbrook, Donte Moncrief, Keelan Cole

Arizona (Rosen):  Fitzgerald (at 35), Christian Kirk, Trent Sherfield, and Chad Williams

Washington:  Josh Doctson, Jamison Crowder, and Maurice Harris

Jets:  Robby Anderson, Quncy Enunwa, and Jermaine Kearse  

Tennessee:   Corey Davis, Taywan Taylor, and Tajae Sharpe

Baltimore:  John Brown, Willie Snead, and Michael Crabtree 

 

It's arguable at best.  But either way, take any set of those and put them on our team last season, do you see a big difference in Allen's play?  I don't.  

 

Either way, we have Brown and Beasley now, so everything's fixed I'm told.  I'm still skeptical, but if after three years McBeane can't figure this out, then they in fact need to go.  

 

 

 

 

 

[Ronin]

4 hours ago, Fred Slacks said:

How is someone watched Allen last season and is unable to recognize his improvement over the last 5-6 games of the season is beyond me. They need to rewatch the games. Don’t look at the stats. The ball is placed just fine. A few times it’s placed incredibly well. 

 

I don't think that anyone has argued that he didn't improve.  But even his last six games were below average.  He averaged a mere 1 TD/game in the first five of those last 6 games.  The Miami game really skewed his stats in several signiifcant areas, Red Zone passing being one of them.  In the first five of those games he had only 2 RZ TDs in 5 games.  Not even one every other game.  His splits for what would typically indicate RZ type of play were horrific, over his last six as well as all season.  

 

I've laid this out before, but over his last six he was 94 for 181 (51.9%), 1,242 Yards (207/game), 8 TDs, 7 INTs, 72.6 rating (which sucks), YPA of 6.9, Adj. YPA of 6.0.  

 

So while yes, it was improvement, I mean who can possibly argue that it wasn't improvement, it was.  But still, here's how those six weeks ranked among NFL QBs on the entire season, including the other rookies whose first bunch of games we didn't remove like we did Allen's; 

 

Rating:  Nothing changes, Allen still ranks 32nd of 33 ahead of only Rosen. 

Compl. %:  Allen still rates DFL 

YPA:  Allen ranks tied with Darnold for 26th

Adj. YPA:  Allen still ranks 32nd ahead of only Rosen 

Yards/Game: he ranks 30th ahead of Mariota, Tannehill, and Rosen. 

 

So yes, there was improvement, but consider how bad he was if that's improvement.  Because "franchise QB status" is so astronomically above that it'll be a miracle if he hits it this season.  It'll be very fortuitous if he can even play like an average QB this season insofar as the passing game goes.  

 

His 2nd and 3rd down games are the worst in the league.  It didn't change at the end of the season. 

His Red Zone game is horrific, worst in the league.  The Miami game literally doubled his RZ stats on the entire season.  

His short-game is highly questionable at best. 

He's TO prone.

He has trouble both pre and post snap reading plays.  

 

If he can manage to get himself to average NFL QB performance it'll be fortuitous and something to build on.  

 

Last season the average NFL QB (16th/17th rankings):  

 

3,800 Yards (approx. 240 YPG) 

22 Passing TDs

11 INTs 

7.5 YPA

95 Rating

66% Completions 

 

That's a very significant jump from where he was.  So yes, there was improvement, but no, even with that improvement he didn't finish with good metrics.  

 

If he can play like he did vs. Miami all season for 16 games, we're looking at the next Mahomes.  If not, we may very well be looking at the next Locker or Leinart.  Then of course there's everything in between.  

Edited June 25, 2019 by Ronin

[Rocky Landing]

2 hours ago, Ronin said:

 

Yes, please, pin this.  

 

ROC, why don't you go take a good hard look at my takes on Watkins, Manuel, Spiller, Lawson, Ragland, Zay Jones, and a bunch of others.  

 

I GUARANTEE you some have but needless to say, my takes on them weren't reposted.  Funny how that works.  

 

But yes, please, pin this.  

 

 

Correct, IF.  

 

We'll see.  But if not, then I envision no scenario where McBeane are kept on, meaning we'll be back at the proverbial "square one" like we've been for years.  

 

Again, RISKY.  Very.  There were far less risky approaches to make us better.  That's the ultimate goal here, to make us playoff competitive.  

 

2 hours ago, Ronin said:

 

Don't take this personally, but I'm not using your opinion, I'm using hard data.  That's exactly the problem in this place, opinions trump facts and hard data.  

 

Until week 17 Allen was DFL by a country mile in the Red Zone even well behind Rosen.  It was only after that Fins game, one game, where he essentially doubled his RZ stats that rendered him comparable to Rosen.  

 

He was ranked 35th of 35 in uncatchable passes.  That means he ranked behind Jackson, Darnold, Mayfield, and yes, even Rosen as such.  Statistically he ranked essentially right alongside Rosen.  

 

Whether or not it's your or anyone's opinion is irrelevant.  It's not my opinion either, it's facts and hard data that I'm basing my arguments on.  Anything to the contrary at this point, ANYTHING, is pure speculation.  The rest is nothing more than excuses.  We all get it, only a minority portion of Allen's issues actually had to do with him, the rest was the fault of the coaches, team, other players, etc.  

 

Great news however, our OL is now well above average, we finally have stud WRs, and Daboll's going to fix the rest.  So we're good.  

 

 

 

 

 

I have suspected this for a while, but now I seriously believe that Ronin (Tasker's Ghost) has a personality disorder.

("Hard data" LOL!!!)

[CincyBillsFan]

8 hours ago, Ronin said:

 

Don't take this personally, but I'm not using your opinion, I'm using hard data.  That's exactly the problem in this place, opinions trump facts and hard data.  

 

Until week 17 Allen was DFL by a country mile in the Red Zone even well behind Rosen.  It was only after that Fins game, one game, where he essentially doubled his RZ stats that rendered him comparable to Rosen.  

 

He was ranked 35th of 35 in uncatchable passes.  That means he ranked behind Jackson, Darnold, Mayfield, and yes, even Rosen as such.  Statistically he ranked essentially right alongside Rosen.  

 

Whether or not it's your or anyone's opinion is irrelevant.  It's not my opinion either, it's facts and hard data that I'm basing my arguments on.  Anything to the contrary at this point, ANYTHING, is pure speculation.  The rest is nothing more than excuses.  We all get it, only a minority portion of Allen's issues actually had to do with him, the rest was the fault of the coaches, team, other players, etc.  

 

Great news however, our OL is now well above average, we finally have stud WRs, and Daboll's going to fix the rest.  So we're good.  

 

 

 

 

 

Don't take this personally, but you do NOT deal in hard data and facts you're a world class cherry picker.  I love how you use "until week 17" to remove Allen's best statistical performance from the discussion.  Gee the guy only started and completed 10 games and you're throwing out 10% of his play because it doesn't fit your narrative.  This is the kind of stuff that gives statistics a bad name. 

 

Then you tout the "fact" that Allen led the league in "uncatcable passes"!  Gee for a guy who claims to have watched all sorts of video on Allen you didn't notice all those balls he threw away into the stands?  Do you think that maybe because the O-line struggled Daboll told Allen to throw the damn ball away rather then take a sack?  Then you compare this "stat" to the # of uncatchable passes thrown by Rosen as if that's a bad thing!  Well Rosen is a smart QB and if he had Allen's escapibility I bet he would have thrown a lot more "uncatchable" passes into the cheap seats rather then take a sack or throw a pick. 

 

BTW your response doesn't seem to be addressing my point that Allen & Jackson did not play under "similar circumstances" unless you meant things like how they did on 3rd down or in the red zone.  But even if that was your meaning it's still a case of comparing apples & oranges as Jackson & Allen were surrounded by very different supporting casts. 

 

And for someone who only deals in FACTS you sure let your sarcasm get the best of you.  Most of us readily admit that we don't know whether our O-line will be "above average" this year.  What we are CONFIDENT of is that it will be much better then last year.  This means we expect the O-line to be at least average which would be a big improvement over last season.  Do your "facts" and "hard data" tell you otherwise? 

 

As for claiming we have "stud WR's" again who is saying that?  What we did is UPGRADE the receiving group by bringing in SOLID, veteran receivers who represent a clear improvement over last years receivers.  But none of us would mistake Beasley, Brown & Croft as "studs".  But compared to last year having very good veteran receivers is a big step up.

 

Or to keep things simple if your kid is getting an F in math and suddenly starts getting C's were going to be happy & justifiably claim he's much improved.  At the same time this doesn't mean we think he's going to be a world class rocket scientist.  When talking about the Bill's O-line & receivers it's all RELATIVE.

[Ronin]

1 hour ago, CincyBillsFan said:

Don't take this personally, but you do NOT deal in hard data and facts you're a world class cherry picker.  I love how you use "until week 17" to remove Allen's best statistical performance from the discussion.  Gee the guy only started and completed 10 games and you're throwing out 10% of his play because it doesn't fit your narrative.  This is the kind of stuff that gives statistics a bad name. 

 

I didn't remove it, I merely pointed out that it literally doubled several of his significant stats, and I pointed some of those out.

 

It's funny tho, people arguing such as you just did have issues with removing one game in a myriad of games, but then they'll turn around and use that one game while  ignoring that myriad to form a steady-state in their mind.  LOL  

 

1 hour ago, CincyBillsFan said:

Gee for a guy who claims to have watched all sorts of video on Allen you didn't notice all those balls he threw away into the stands?  Do you think that maybe because the O-line struggled Daboll told Allen to throw the damn ball away rather then take a sack?  Then you compare this "stat" to the # of uncatchable passes thrown by Rosen as if that's a bad thing!  Well Rosen is a smart QB and if he had Allen's escapibility I bet he would have thrown a lot more "uncatchable" passes into the cheap seats rather then take a sack or throw a pick. 

 

Might be a good idea to do some research on what uncatchable passes are before making a post like that.  Just sayin'.  

 

We've been over ther rest of the stuff in your post several times.  No need to continue the back-n-forth on it.  I know your position you know mine, or at least you should although posts like the rest of this one make me wonder.  Either way, no need to rehash the same stuff over.  If you didn't get it the first, second,or third times you won't get it on the fourth and following times either.  Besides, it would seem that some of your definitions and understanding of statistical categories is incongruous with reality.  So at that point we're speaking different languages.  

 

 

 

Edited June 25, 2019 by Ronin

[thebandit27]

15 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

I didn't remove it, I merely pointed out that it literally doubled several of his significant stats, and I pointed some of those out.

 

It's funny tho, people arguing such as you just did have issues with removing one game in a myriad of games, but then they'll turn around and use that one game while  ignoring that myriad to form a steady-state in their mind.  LOL  

 

 

Nope.  Not one single person has done that.  Ever.  I've seen you accuse people of it (my guess is that you did so in order to cement in your own mind that people are doing it), but that's as far as it goes.  In fact, I challenge you to link to one single person ever suggesting anything even close to what you're implying here.

 

Moreover, I pointed out to you that even if you do go through the ridiculous practice of removing week 17 from his statistics, he still showed a marked improvement in his passing from pre-injury to post-injury.

 

It all comes back to that whole honesty thing; for whatever reason, you seem unwilling to just call it down the middle and acknowledge the points that don't support your case.  It costs you in terms of credibility, which is a shame, because there's actually a part of you that appears to want to have a substantive discussion about Allen.

 

[Patrick Duffy]

32 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

I didn't remove it, I merely pointed out that it literally doubled several of his significant stats, and I pointed some of those out.

 

It's funny tho, people arguing such as you just did have issues with removing one game in a myriad of games, but then they'll turn around and use that one game while  ignoring that myriad to form a steady-state in their mind.  LOL  

 

 

Might be a good idea to do some research on what uncatchable passes are before making a post like that.  Just sayin'.  

 

We've been over ther rest of the stuff in your post several times.  No need to continue the back-n-forth on it.  I know your position you know mine, or at least you should although posts like the rest of this one make me wonder.  Either way, no need to rehash the same stuff over.  If you didn't get it the first, second,or third times you won't get it on the fourth and following times either.  Besides, it would seem that some of your definitions and understanding of statistical categories is incongruous with reality.  So at that point we're speaking different languages.  

 

 

 

 

Just wondering why you didn't acknowledge @Alphadawg7 couple of post quoting your posts earlier? He actually made very good counter arguments towards a couple of your post. You quoted everyone else that has put up an argument in reference to your post but except his.

 

Just wondering because I was looking forward to see how you planned on responding to his statements (which made a ton of sense IMO).

 

Anyway, tickle party at high noon.

[Ronin]

36 minutes ago, Patrick_Duffy said:

Just wondering why you didn't acknowledge @Alphadawg7

 

He's on my ignore list for posting nonsense too many times.  I don't have the time or inclination to deal with nonsense.  

[NewEra]

7 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

He's on my ignore list for posting nonsense too many times.  I don't have the time or inclination to deal with nonsense.  

That usually happens when the “nonsense” isn’t a cherry picked reply and shoots down ones theories and makes it I possible to sway the debate in your favor.  At this moment, you COULD read his replies and state your rebuttal........but

12 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

He's on my ignore list for posting nonsense too many times.  I don't have the time or inclination to deal with nonsense.  

That usually happens when the “nonsense” isn’t a cherry picked reply and shoots down ones theories and makes it I possible to sway the debate in your favor.  At this moment, you COULD read his replies and state your rebuttal........but

 

youve been here since 2009?  Never noticed til this month.  Did your son or daughter start watching football and took over your account?

[Ronin]

10 minutes ago, NewEra said:

That usually happens when the “nonsense” isn’t a cherry picked reply and shoots down ones theories and makes it I possible to sway the debate in your favor.  At this moment, you COULD read his replies and state your rebuttal........but

That usually happens when the “nonsense” isn’t a cherry picked reply and shoots down ones theories and makes it I possible to sway the debate in your favor.  At this moment, you COULD read his replies and state your rebuttal........but

 

youve been here since 2009?  Never noticed til this month.  Did your son or daughter start watching football and took over your account?

 

LOL 

 

Really? 

 

Otherwise, I'm pretty sure that whatever he's asked has already been answered elsewhere.  

 

I don't take part in petty discussions where posters render their personal opinions of me or my personality devoid of anything critical to discuss.  If you don't like it, too bad.  

 

 

Edited June 25, 2019 by Ronin

[Alphadawg7]

37 minutes ago, Ronin said:

 

He's on my ignore list for posting nonsense too many times.  I don't have the time or inclination to deal with nonsense.  

 

Pretty sure that is just an excuse since I am pretty sure I have not had any other discussions with Ronin, nor any flare ups.  And people may not always agree with one of my takes, but I think most would agree I don't spew typical TSW nonsense around here.  

 

I would bet money I am not on Ronin's ignore list and he just didn't reply because he didnt have a logical response to my comments that still supported his flawed stance.  

[NewEra]

1 hour ago, Ronin said:

 

LOL 

 

Really? 

 

Otherwise, I'm pretty sure that whatever he's asked has already been answered elsewhere.  

 

I don't take part in petty discussions where posters render their personal opinions of me or my personality devoid of anything critical to discuss.  If you don't like it, too bad.  

 

 

“I’m pretty sure” when you have no idea what he even said?  Pretty awesome.

 

It’s apparent to me, after reading this thread, that “petty discussion = posts that discredit your side of the discussion”.  From my experience, you consistently cherry pick only the statements that you feel you can discredit while not discussing the others.  

[K-9]

54 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Pretty sure that is just an excuse since I am pretty sure I have not had any other discussions with Ronin, nor any flare ups.  And people may not always agree with one of my takes, but I think most would agree I don't spew typical TSW nonsense around here.  

 

I would bet money I am not on Ronin's ignore list and he just didn't reply because he didnt have a logical response to my comments that still supported his flawed stance.  

I get the same impression. I know I busted his chops with the Jerry Sullivan thing, but I’ve asked him a couple legit questions with no response. Oh well. I’m in good company at least.

[Rocky Landing]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Pretty sure that is just an excuse since I am pretty sure I have not had any other discussions with Ronin, nor any flare ups.  And people may not always agree with one of my takes, but I think most would agree I don't spew typical TSW nonsense around here.  

 

I would bet money I am not on Ronin's ignore list and he just didn't reply because he didnt have a logical response to my comments that still supported his flawed stance.  

IDK, Alpha, his ignore list is enormous. And, presenting him with arguments that he does not have an answer for is exactly what gets you on that list. Welcome to the club!

[wiley16350]

On 6/24/2019 at 12:41 PM, mattynh said:

 

 

Yeah, I share your concern.  There seems to be a lot of people who have no concern and think Allen is refined.....his "catchable balls" are right up there and his completion % issue is only due to the other players on the Bills offense last year.   The high end of production to expect/hope for out of Beasley is something like 2018 Zay Jones numbers....maybe a few more catches.  There seems to be a disproportionate amount of excitement about Beasley compared to what his past production/value are.

I think the majority of people know that Allen needs to improve with his decision making.  I think you'll get most people to agree that he needs to get faster to checking down or throwing the shorter throws.  That is something that should improve the more he plays and the team gets better around him, which is why people aren't writing him off or getting bent out of shape because that is who the Bills drafted.  I also think that the majority of people know that Allen's decision making is part of the reason why his completion % was so low.  Nobody believes that Allen played no role in his low completion%.  With that said, the receivers and offensive line did play a significant role in his poor completion % with drops and separation.  PFF has confirmed that with their stats.  What most Allen supporters strongly deny is that his accuracy is a detrimental aspect of his game and will keep him from becoming a franchise QB.  I think that Allen supporters would agree that Allen needs to improve catch-ability of his passes but we also understand, that catch-ability can be improved through confidence in the receivers to be open, to catch the ball and the offensive line to properly protect.  It will also improve if Allen is more confident in his decision making.  Ultimately, there wasn't really that many throws where Allen completely missed his targets for no reason (in terms of accuracy).  I do believe other QB's did that more than Allen did.

[Alphadawg7]

29 minutes ago, Rocky Landing said:

IDK, Alpha, his ignore list is enormous. And, presenting him with arguments that he does not have an answer for is exactly what gets you on that list. Welcome to the club!

 

Hahaha, that’s probably spot on.  Although I still suspect he pretends to have many of them on the ignore list and is really seeing them.

[Mark Long Beach]

Ironically, I think that there's a nice kernel of a solid defensible viewpoint in what Ronin's been saying here in this thread. 

 

It's a shame he has consistently wanted to stroke the flames of trolldom rather than reasonably defend viewpoints contrary to the prevailing wisdom / wishful thinking of optimistic fans.   It's legitimate to have different takes on what data means and everyone's eye test is a little different.  But it's not a discussion and not really worth reading when it really becomes more about pouring gasoline on a bonfire to agitate others.  

 

I like to learn more and even hear about views that differ from mine.  But any point of Ronin/STG gets lost by him trying to piss people off and not engage in an honest conversation.

 

A pity.   

[Teddy KGB]

4 hours ago, Mark Long Beach said:

Ironically, I think that there's a nice kernel of a solid defensible viewpoint in what Ronin's been saying here in this thread. 

 

It's a shame he has consistently wanted to stroke the flames of trolldom rather than reasonably defend viewpoints contrary to the prevailing wisdom / wishful thinking of optimistic fans.   It's legitimate to have different takes on what data means and everyone's eye test is a little different.  But it's not a discussion and not really worth reading when it really becomes more about pouring gasoline on a bonfire to agitate others.  

 

I like to learn more and even hear about views that differ from mine.  But any point of Ronin/STG gets lost by him trying to piss people off and not engage in an honest conversation.

 

A pity.   

 

It’s a tryhard dumpster fire.   

 

 

[3rdand12]

9 hours ago, Patrick_Duffy said:

 

Just wondering why you didn't acknowledge @Alphadawg7 couple of post quoting your posts earlier? He actually made very good counter arguments towards a couple of your post. You quoted everyone else that has put up an argument in reference to your post but except his.

 

Just wondering because I was looking forward to see how you planned on responding to his statements (which made a ton of sense IMO).

 

Anyway, tickle party at high noon.

open invite ?