Have You Started To Lose Faith in Josh Allen?

[oldmanfan]

Just now, london_bills said:

There can be an element of the grass is greener yes.

 

I would like to the see the potential of a strong 3 TD game at some point to take me away from the doubt of a 3 INT game. We haven't seen that yet.

 

I have seen good things but also remember the start of the jests game was scripted. The start of the half against the patriots was scripted.

 

Does he have the it factor? I'm not convinced, but I admit yesterday's game started to plant the seed of doubt. 

 

 

 

I think the first 3 games show us he has what it takes, but he has to get consistent.  The first few games he was getting the ball out on time, taking the shorter throws.  Yes, a couple poor decisions but overall good and brought his team back three times.  That shows great potential to me.  I’m hoping yesterday was a combination of not being ready for the bright lights and Belichick.  

[Buffalo716]

13 minutes ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

We'll just have to disagree.

Thays fine but here's backups I unquestionably would take over him

 

Eli manning , Teddy Bridgewater, Ryan Tannehill, Chase Daniels, Brian Hoyer, Blake Bortles, Fitzpatrick, Foles/minshaw, Matt Moore, Jarrett stidham

 

So maybe he's closer to 40

 

He isn't bottom 5 but definitely not top 5

Edited September 30, 2019 by Buffalo716

[CincyBillsFan]

7 hours ago, JAMIEBUF12 said:

Def not losing faith.I feel Josh and the team are still jelling and learning what works and what does not work.Obviously the coaches will show Josh that defenses are going to try to force you to roll right and bait you into a mistake.Knowing that like last year not being good at the short game Josh will grow or turn that part of his game into a strength...

on a side note I know Sam Darnold only played one game , but how is Baker Mayfield,Josh Rosen and Lamar Jackson all doing in their second year??? I’d say Josh is right on par with the rest of the year two quarterbacks.GO BILLS!

 

I agree that Allen is still at the head of this class but by a small margin:

 

*  Baker's opening game at home was like Allen's was yesterday minus going up against an elite pass defense and evil genius coach.  Baker threw 3 INT's and lost a fumble that game.  Also, there isn't a defense in the NFL that Allen wouldn't score on given FOUR shots from the 4 yard line. Baker couldn't in a home game against the Rams.

 

*  Rosen showed life yesterday against LA but overall has done nothing yet this year playing for the worst team in football.

 

*  Jackson started hot but the Ravens have lost 2 in a row and when it mattered Jackson was pretty bad in both games.  Sure he tacked on 2 TD passes and probably 150 yards against KC & Cleveland's BACK UP defenders playing a PREVENT defense to make his stats look better then Allen's but it's fools gold if you think 50 yard TD throws with 50 seconds left in a game you're trailing by 40 - 19 mean anything.

 

As usual people are way over reacting to what happened yesterday.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bangarang]

9 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Most guys who are currently considered established franchise QBs in the NFL right now were good as soon as they got on the field. 

You have to know your audience here. There were people here still believing EJ Manuel would win the QB competition for Rex and suddenly be a franchise QB in his 3rd year.

Edited September 30, 2019 by Bangarang

[london_bills]

1 minute ago, Bangarang said:

You have to know your audience here. There were people here still believing EJ Manuel would win the QB competition for Rex and suddenly be a franchise QB. 

Yes I remember the EJ Manuel belief.

Hyped by Whaley also.

 

I don't want Allen to be good either. I want him to be great.

 

The words 'Grow' and 'Develop' sound like great words, like it WILL happen.

It may not. 

 

Surely the only real test is against good teams. Perhaps one could settle lower for a player who beats the teams he should beat, probably won't win a championship like that though.

[jrober38]

7 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

You have to know your audience here. There were people here still believing EJ Manuel would win the QB competition for Rex and suddenly be a franchise QB. 

 

People here usually refuse to look at things objectively. It's all emotional hope that what you see with your own eyes will get better, and it's not as bad as it seems.

 

People are projecting what they want to be reality. They want to think Allen knows he's often making stupid decisions with the ball, and although he's shown minimal proof that he learns anything from his mistakes, they're convinced the light will go off any game now and he'll just start taking care of the football. 

 

Reality is that the guys in Allen's camp who post a QB rating of below 70 through 16 games (I know he's a game short) very rarely go onto become franchise QBs in the NFL. There are a few outliers (Eli, Stafford, Goff), but they were all #1 overall picks who went to horrible teams. Allen's situation is different. Most successful QBs were highly successful as soon as they got on the field. 

 

Anyways, Allen does some things well, and some things poorly. As I've said since before we picked him, I'm not sure the good will ever be enough to outweigh the bad, but hopefully I'm wrong. The rest of this team is awesome and we should be competing for the Super Bowl right now. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by jrober38

[GunnerBill]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

Thays fine but here's backups I unquestionably would take over him

 

Eli manning , Teddy Bridgewater, Ryan Tannehill, Chase Daniels, Brian Hoyer, Blake Bortles, Fitzpatrick, Foles/minshaw, Matt Moore, Jarrett stidham

 

He isn't bottom 5 but definitely not top 5

 

I am scrubbing Tannehill (I know I am out on a limb on him but he is suckiest of all sucks) and Matt Moore (think he is done) from your list but I am adding Tyrod Taylor, Kyle Allen and Case Keenum (who it would appear is now the backup) and based only on pre-season Ryan Finley would be close too.

 

Barkley is about halfway in the NFL backups list. 

[oldmanfan]

17 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Most guys who are currently considered established franchise QBs in the NFL right now were good as soon as they got on the field. 

Brees has 17 TDS and 16 picks his first full season.  Goff suffered his rookie year.  Should I go on?

[Phil The Thrill]

1 hour ago, PromoTheRobot said:

 

It looks like my scenario will work itself out anyway. Allen won't play Sunday, my gut tells me. Benching him, sitting him, concussion protocol, all adds up the same. He won't be back til the Miami game.

Your gut is wrong.  Time for more fiber or maybe some Pepto

[Buffalo716]

Just now, GunnerBill said:

 

I am scrubbing Tannehill (I know I am out on a limb on him but he is suckiest of all sucks) and Matt Moore (think he is done) from your list but I am adding Tyrod Taylor, Kyle Allen and Case Keenum (who it would appear is now the backup) and based only on pre-season Ryan Finley would be close too.

 

Barkley is about halfway in the NFL backups list. 

I thought I had TT on my list... Definitely add him

 

Case keenum definitely if he counts and Kyle Allen getting there for sure

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, oldmanfan said:

Brees has 17 TDS and 16 picks his first full season.  Goff suffered his rookie year.  Should I go on?

 

"Most" was the key word in my previous post. 

Eli (horrible for about 4 years), Stafford, Goff and I guess Brees although he was a 2nd round pick didn't start great immediately.

 

They were also all drafted by the worst team in the NFL and went to horrible football teams. 

[BTC]

How come nobody has stated the obvious that the Pats D confused Allen yet Daboll decided to go empty sets or with Yeldon vs continuing to feed Gore who had 88 yards at the half??  Run the damn ball and let our defense win.  It’s really that easy people.  Minus the turnovers and running the ball we win that game easily.

[CincyBillsFan]

2 hours ago, dakrider said:

Brady's completion % in the game ended up same as Allen's.  And it was Brady who threw the endzone int.  Also Brady was not sacked at all and got lucky on 2 throws that should have been called grounding.  Biggest difference is Brady threw some passes away whereas Josh tried to force them in.  Allen did have a bad game, and if he had a great game Bills likely would have won.  I think though it would have still taken more than if Allen had just shown up and made a few passes and handed the ball off.  

I think the last QB to have a great game against the Patriots was the middle of last year.  
Whats really amazing is how so many Bills fans seem to think Allen should come out every game and play great every quarter he's on the field.  Which seems odd  considering they haven't really had many if any good QB's in last 20 years or so and Bills receiving corp is still considered to be in the lower 1/3 of the NFL. 

 

Simple thought exercise:  Let's take Brady's game stats & give them to Allen and give Allen's to Brady:

 

*  First if you told me before the game that Allen would attempt 36 passes and complete less then half of them for 150 yards, NO TD's (rushing or passing); have multiple 3 & outs; and throw an INT in the Pat's end zone to kill a drive I would have thought we lose the game 27 - 3.

 

* Now, back to the exercise.  Give Brady Allen's stats and IMO the Pats still win.  NONE of Allen's 3 INT's gave NE the ball in our Red Zone or took away a Bills red zone opportunity.  So instead of going 3 & out and punting & giving the Bills the ball at their own 40, Brady, throwing Allen's INT's, would have given the Bills the ball at midfield.  Somehow I think the Pat's D could handle it.  So lets say the Bill's get a FG or two off the 3 INT's.

 

*  And with Allen channeling Brady he would have thrown a red zone INT like Brady did so you could take that Bills TD off the board. 

 

*  IMO switching the passing numbers means that Bills probably lose the game 16 - 6 or maybe 16 - 9. 

 

Now if you switch the punters stats giving the Bill's the Pat's guys numbers and vice versa what do you think the final score of the game is?

 

I'm not saying Allen didn't have a bad day - he did.  What I am saying is that Allen DID NOT lose us the game.  IMO the blocked punt for a TD cost us the game. 

 

Not all INT's are the same.  An overly aggressive throw downfield that gives your opponent the ball at midfield is NOT the same as a PICK 6!  And a bad decision that results in an INT at midfield is NOT the same as throwing an INT in your opponents red zone.

[Phil The Thrill]

9 minutes ago, london_bills said:

Yes I remember the EJ Manuel belief.

Hyped by Whaley also.

 

I don't want Allen to be good either. I want him to be great.

 

The words 'Grow' and 'Develop' sound like great words, like it WILL happen.

It may not. 

 

Surely the only real test is against good teams. Perhaps one could settle lower for a player who beats the teams he should beat, probably won't win a championship like that though.

This is exactly my concern.  There’s no guarantee that it WILL happen.  I need to see more 3 TD games and not 3 INT games before I feel more confident about it

[Scott7975]

2 hours ago, Phil The Thrill said:

How do you explain the success of a player like Daniel Jones?  In just a few starts, he is elevating the entire offense.

 

How much time should we give Allen?  5 years?  6 years?

 

If he’s any good we should see progress soon.  And “progress” was not what we saw yesterday 

No tape and easy game plan designed to be simple to run for him.  We have players saying its the most complicated offense they have been in.  Maybe that is part of the problem?  Rookies that do well usually have coaches that make things easy for them.  That does not sound like what is happening on our team.

 

Also Jones threw 1 TD and 2 INTs against Washington this week.  The week before he had two fumbles and was sacked 5 times.  You know... the things people are criticizing Alan for.  Maybe Jones turns out to be awesome.  I don't know.  Just like Allan, it's too early to say.

[GunnerBill]

7 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Brees has 17 TDS and 16 picks his first full season.  Goff suffered his rookie year.  Should I go on?

 

Those Brees numbers still outstrip Allen. I don't think he is a particularly strong argument. And I think the game has changed too. To be honest Stafford would pretty much be my starting point. Anything further back I'd be tempted to discount. 

2 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Simple thought exercise:  Let's take Brady's game stats & give them to Allen and give Allen's to Brady:

 

*  First if you told me before the game that Allen would attempt 36 passes and complete less then half of them for 150 yards, NO TD's (rushing or passing); have multiple 3 & outs; and throw an INT in the Pat's end zone to kill a drive I would have thought we lose the game 27 - 3.

 

* Now, back to the exercise.  Give Brady Allen's stats and IMO the Pats still win.  NONE of Allen's 3 INT's gave NE the ball in our Red Zone or took away a Bills red zone opportunity.  So instead of going 3 & out and punting & giving the Bills the ball at their own 40, Brady, throwing Allen's INT's, would have given the Bills the ball at midfield.  Somehow I think the Pat's D could handle it.  So lets say the Bill's get a FG or two off the 3 INT's.

 

*  And with Allen channeling Brady he would have thrown a red zone INT like Brady did so you could take that Bills TD off the board. 

 

*  IMO switching the passing numbers means that Bills probably lose the game 16 - 6 or maybe 16 - 9. 

 

Now if you switch the punters stats giving the Bill's the Pat's guys numbers and vice versa what do you think the final score of the game is?

 

I'm not saying Allen didn't have a bad day - he did.  What I am saying is that Allen DID NOT lose us the game.  IMO the blocked punt for a TD cost us the game. 

 

Not all INT's are the same.  An overly aggressive throw downfield that gives your opponent the ball at midfield is NOT the same as a PICK 6!  And a bad decision that results in an INT at midfield is NOT the same as throwing an INT in your opponents red zone.

 

What about the two sacks that took points off the board? 

[John from Riverside]

31 minutes ago, Buffalo716 said:

My eyes and using my football knowledge.

 

He is not anywhere close to an elite backup, he has a negative TD to INT ratio throughout his career and doesn't give you any improv skills. He throws 3 routes well

 

So he is extremely limited

 

 

There are 64 QBs who are top 2 on Depth chart's. He isn't top 40. Closer to 50

 

I actually disagree with this....totally ok with Matt as backup.

 

He isnt as Mobile

he does throw with much more anticipation at this point

he makes up for physical limitations with smarts

 

A backup QB.....good for about 3 games a year.

[Scott7975]

2 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Those Brees numbers still outstrip Allen. I don't think he is a particularly strong argument. And I think the game has changed too. To be honest Stafford would pretty much be my starting point. Anything further back I'd be tempted to discount. 

 

What about the two sacks that took points off the board? 

Can we get Megatron instead of Zay Jones?  Obviously Stafford is a very good QB, but he has had a star for most of his career to throw to. 

[CincyBillsFan]

6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

 

What about the two sacks that took points off the board? 

 

One of those sacks still gave us a chance to kick a 49 yard FG.  That was a bad miss IMO in perfect weather conditions.  I see 50 yard kicks being made all the time in the NFL.  Again Special Teams play yesterday had more to do with the loss then Allen's poor play.

 

But yea, you can get the game score to change a bit depending on how you move the plays around but I see NO scenario where if you switch the numbers between Brady & Allen the Pat's still don't win the game.  And that's because in a very close defensive game like yesterday giving up a Special Team TD is almost always fatal.  Even more fatal then throwing 3 INT's that give your opponent the ball around midfield.

 

 

Edited September 30, 2019 by CincyBillsFan

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

3 hours ago, Heitz said:

 

I had some friends yesterday that said Josh had a lot of time in the pocket yesterday.  Did we watch the same game?  The online is better than last year, but still struggling at times...

 

 

And anyone that's giving up on a QB 4 games into his second season needs some perspective on achieving results.  Rome was not build in a day, kids.   

 

He did have a fair amount of snaps where he had time - we also were struggling to shake man coverage, especially during the sacks.

[jkeerie]

One thing that cannot be overlooked.  We've seen other QBs get away with "poor decisions"...throwing across their bodies, throwing into coverage...and getting away with it.  Mahomes and Lamar Jackson are among that group.  Their receivers make plays and bail them out.  Instead of getting castigated, their throws end up on highlight reels.  Now before anyone touts that Mahomes and Jackson are better than Josh at this point...I'm not saying he's in their company.  My point is...he doesn't have the receivers to allow him to get away with bad decisions.  I think he needs to put that realization at the top of his lesson plan.

[Phil The Thrill]

3 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Simple thought exercise:  Let's take Brady's game stats & give them to Allen and give Allen's to Brady:

 

*  First if you told me before the game that Allen would attempt 36 passes and complete less then half of them for 150 yards, NO TD's (rushing or passing); have multiple 3 & outs; and throw an INT in the Pat's end zone to kill a drive I would have thought we lose the game 27 - 3.

 

* Now, back to the exercise.  Give Brady Allen's stats and IMO the Pats still win.  NONE of Allen's 3 INT's gave NE the ball in our Red Zone or took away a Bills red zone opportunity.  So instead of going 3 & out and punting & giving the Bills the ball at their own 40, Brady, throwing Allen's INT's, would have given the Bills the ball at midfield.  Somehow I think the Pat's D could handle it.  So lets say the Bill's get a FG or two off the 3 INT's.

 

*  And with Allen channeling Brady he would have thrown a red zone INT like Brady did so you could take that Bills TD off the board. 

 

*  IMO switching the passing numbers means that Bills probably lose the game 16 - 6 or maybe 16 - 9. 

 

Now if you switch the punters stats giving the Bill's the Pat's guys numbers and vice versa what do you think the final score of the game is?

 

I'm not saying Allen didn't have a bad day - he did.  What I am saying is that Allen DID NOT lose us the game.  IMO the blocked punt for a TD cost us the game. 

 

Not all INT's are the same.  An overly aggressive throw downfield that gives your opponent the ball at midfield is NOT the same as a PICK 6!  And a bad decision that results in an INT at midfield is NOT the same as throwing an INT in your opponents red zone.

This is really selective reasoning.  The INT’s were just ONE part Allen’s horrible game.  In your analysis you don’t take into account how his poor pocket presence took the Bills out of FG range twice and his sack knocked the Bills back 6 yards where Hauschka missed a FG.  
 

[MarkAF43]

Not at all. 

[Buffalo716]

3 minutes ago, John from Riverside said:

I actually disagree with this....totally ok with Matt as backup.

 

He isnt as Mobile

he does throw with much more anticipation at this point

he makes up for physical limitations with smarts

 

A backup QB.....good for about 3 games a year.

I don't think I ever said he was a bad backup

 

There are people in the thread calling him a top backup in the NFL , he isn't

 

He is a capable to good backup depending on the day but is easily gameplanned for

 

[jrober38]

3 minutes ago, jkeerie said:

One thing that cannot be overlooked.  We've seen other QBs get away with "poor decisions"...throwing across their bodies, throwing into coverage...and getting away with it.  Mahomes and Lamar Jackson are among that group.  Their receivers make plays and bail them out.  Instead of getting castigated, their throws end up on highlight reels.  Now before anyone touts that Mahomes and Jackson are better than Josh at this point...I'm not saying he's in their company.  My point is...he doesn't have the receivers to allow him to get away with bad decisions.  I think he needs to put that realization at the top of his lesson plan.

 

I think this is an excuse because those guys aren't exactly throwing to house hold names. I also don't see them making stupid decisions with the football. 

 

Allen puts the ball in harms way too often. Too many fumbles and too many interceptions. 

 

The Bills rebuilt the offensive line, rebuild the running back depth chart, rebuilt the receiver depth chart, and the results in the pass game haven't been much better. That's a big concern in my eyes. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by jrober38

[CincyBillsFan]

Just now, Phil The Thrill said:

This is really selective reasoning.  The INT’s were just ONE part Allen’s horrible game.  In your analysis you don’t take into account how his poor pocket presence took the Bills out of FG range twice and his sack knocked the Bills back 6 yards where Hauschka missed a FG.  
 

 

They are?  Our FG kicker should be able to make a 49 yard kick on a perfect weather day.  As far as the rest goes I remember one other sack that took us out of FG range, NOT two.

 

Also Brady had a lot of 3 & outs that would have hurt the Bills to. 

 

IMO any way you look at it if you switch Brady & Allen's PERFORMANCE yesterday, the Pats still win.  But if you switch the punters performance the Bills win.  I don't see how it can be more objective and honest then that.

 

 

[Chicken Boo]

I'm on this dude's side.  I really am.  He has tons of potential and is a gamer for sure, but his play is erratic.

 

He is not disciplined with his mechanics and it gets him in trouble more often than not.  

 

There was a thread boasting his completion percentage a week or 2 ago.  Well now Josh is flirting with the 50s again, has 3 TDs to 6 Ints and a QB rating of 69.  That is not good.

 

I'm losing faith in him.

 

[reddogblitz]

12 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

What about the two sacks that took points off the board? 

 

This is my pet peeve in football and I see it a lot.  You're on the opponents 33 yard line and it's 3rd and long.  You drop your QB 10 yards deep to pat the ball and look for a WR downfield.  Meanwhile, the D blitzes the pants off of you knocking you out of FG range.  Especially with our D, run or run something safe to get the FG if you don't get the first.  

 

It's almost as bad and as predictable as taking a 3-0 pitch in baseball and having the pitcher groove one right over the heart of the plate cuz he knows you're not swinging at it.

[Chicken Boo]

12 hours ago, matter2003 said:

He made Mahomes look bad too last year.

 

For a half.  Pat lit them up in the 2nd half.

[ngbills]

1 hour ago, John from Riverside said:

He is passing for over 250 yards a game (up until last Sunday)

 

That sets a record with Jim Kelly......what exactly do you want?

When did Jim Kelly play? This is a different NFL my friend. In today's NFL 250 yds and you are the bottom third of the league. Back in Kelly's day 250 was close to leading the league or at least top 5. So yes, I want better than bottom third and dont care about how someone compares to 30 year old stats that have drastically changed. 

[bouds]

Didn’t have much to begin with.  He was a raw project with the biggest bust potential, so I tempered my expectations from the jump. He’s actually been better than I thought he would be. Still hoping for the best but my expectations are staying where they’ve always been. 

Edited September 30, 2019 by bouds

[CincyBillsFan]

2 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

 

 

The Bills rebuilt the offensive line, rebuild the running back depth chart, rebuilt the receiver depth chart, and the results in the pass game haven't been much better. That's a big concern in my eyes. 

 

Where would you rank the Bill's running backs?  Even more pertinent to the discussion where would you rank Gore & Yeldon versus the rest of the NFL?  I would put them bottom 5. 

 

The Bills did not rebuild their RBs. They brought in an old war horse; they took a gamble on a rookie 3rd round guy and they added a non-descript journeyman RB in Yeldon who they appear afraid to give the ball to (fumbles anyone).  I think the gamble on Singleterry will work out and cutting McCoy was needed for salary cap efforts going forward.  But it's obvious that McCoy still has gas in the tank and would be helping this team right now if available.  Yesterday's game SCREAMED for McCoy & Gore trading off possessions and slamming the Pats with our running game.  That would have slowed down the pass rush and opened up the receivers. 

 

They did rebuild the O-line taking it from being the 2nd worst O-line in the NFL to one that's probably in the middle of the pack.  Still there is much improvement needed here.

 

They did rebuild the receivers taking them from being the WORST receiving unit in the NFL to middle of the pack.  But we're still looking for a true #1.

 

They did rebuild the TE's taking them from being one of the worst units in the NFL to POTENTIALLY one of the better position groups.  But RIGHT NOW we're relying on 2 rookies and a guy who hasn't played a down yet.

 

All this means is we must have patience with Allen AND Debald.  The offense is still a work in progress.

 

 

[jrober38]

5 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

They are?  Our FG kicker should be able to make a 49 yard kick on a perfect weather day.  As far as the rest goes I remember one other sack that took us out of FG range, NOT two.

 

Also Brady had a lot of 3 & outs that would have hurt the Bills to. 

 

IMO any way you look at it if you switch Brady & Allen's PERFORMANCE yesterday, the Pats still win.  But if you switch the punters performance the Bills win.  I don't see how it can be more objective and honest then that.

 

 

 

NFL kickers are collectively 45 of 64 on field goals from 40 to 49 yards this year, or 70%. 

 

I assume that the percentages are lower for 49 yard field goals vs 42 yard field goals. 

1 minute ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Where would you rank the Bill's running backs?  Even more pertinent to the discussion where would you rank Gore & Yeldon versus the rest of the NFL?  I would put them bottom 5. 

 

The Bills did not rebuild their RBs. They brought in an old war horse; they took a gamble on a rookie 3rd round guy and they added a non-descript journeyman RB in Yeldon who they appear afraid to give the ball to (fumbles anyone).  I think the gamble on Singleterry will work out and cutting McCoy was needed for salary cap efforts going forward.  But it's obvious that McCoy still has gas in the tank and would be helping this team right now if available.  Yesterday's game SCREAMED for McCoy & Gore trading off possessions and slamming the Pats with our running game.  That would have slowed down the pass rush and opened up the receivers. 

 

They did rebuild the O-line taking it from being the 2nd worst O-line in the NFL to one that's probably in the middle of the pack.  Still there is much improvement needed here.

 

They did rebuild the receivers taking them from being the WORST receiving unit in the NFL to middle of the pack.  But we're still looking for a true #1.

 

They did rebuild the TE's taking them from being one of the worst units in the NFL to POTENTIALLY one of the better position groups.  But RIGHT NOW we're relying on 2 rookies and a guy who hasn't played a down yet.

 

All this means is we must have patience with Allen AND Debald.  The offense is still a work in progress.

 

 

 

With the number of upgrades we made, I don't understand how Allen hasn't been able to improve his passer efficiency. 

 

He was at 68 last year in QB Rating, and he's still under 70 right now. I was hoping that number would jump up to around 90, which is still about 20th best in the league. 

 

The pass game has miles to go before it's just average by NFL standards. I'm not sure how likely that is to happen based off what we've seen so far. 

[ngbills]

29 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Simple thought exercise:  Let's take Brady's game stats & give them to Allen and give Allen's to Brady:

 

*  First if you told me before the game that Allen would attempt 36 passes and complete less then half of them for 150 yards, NO TD's (rushing or passing); have multiple 3 & outs; and throw an INT in the Pat's end zone to kill a drive I would have thought we lose the game 27 - 3.

 

* Now, back to the exercise.  Give Brady Allen's stats and IMO the Pats still win.  NONE of Allen's 3 INT's gave NE the ball in our Red Zone or took away a Bills red zone opportunity.  So instead of going 3 & out and punting & giving the Bills the ball at their own 40, Brady, throwing Allen's INT's, would have given the Bills the ball at midfield.  Somehow I think the Pat's D could handle it.  So lets say the Bill's get a FG or two off the 3 INT's.

 

*  And with Allen channeling Brady he would have thrown a red zone INT like Brady did so you could take that Bills TD off the board. 

 

*  IMO switching the passing numbers means that Bills probably lose the game 16 - 6 or maybe 16 - 9. 

 

Now if you switch the punters stats giving the Bill's the Pat's guys numbers and vice versa what do you think the final score of the game is?

 

I'm not saying Allen didn't have a bad day - he did.  What I am saying is that Allen DID NOT lose us the game.  IMO the blocked punt for a TD cost us the game. 

 

Not all INT's are the same.  An overly aggressive throw downfield that gives your opponent the ball at midfield is NOT the same as a PICK 6!  And a bad decision that results in an INT at midfield is NOT the same as throwing an INT in your opponents red zone.

This is drastically underestimating the mistakes that put the Bills out of field goal range. Those were huge and key in losing the game. 

 

Bills had it at NWE 35 and Allen took bad sack putting them out of range

Bills had it at NWE 25 and Allen took bad sack, pushing FG to a 49 yarder which was missed

Bills had 1st downs around mid field on two of his int's

 

That is a lot of points left on table

Edited September 30, 2019 by ngbills

[CincyBillsFan]

8 minutes ago, Chicken Boo said:

 

For a half.  Pat lit them up in the 2nd half.

 

Yea, with KC's skill players and with Andy Reid at coach you've got to expect half time adjustments that work.  And Mahomes is the modern incantation of Dan Marino - a uniquely gifted QB who needed very little time to rise to the top of the NFL.

 

But that doesn't change the FACT that the Pat's were able to shut KC down, at KC, for an ENTIRE half.  That was an amazing defensive performance.  And then 2 weeks later they shut down the LA Rams, probably the 2nd or 3rd best Offense in the league, for the ENTIRE GAME.

 

I know we all hate the Pats but they have elite pass defenders and are coached by the greatest defensive mind in NFL history.  Allen & the offense was always going to suffer yesterday.  I went with my heart & not my head so I was disappointed in Allen & Debald yesterday to.  But after sleeping on it the Bills need to gather their sh## and beat TN next week.  The season is still a LONG way from being lost and Allen is still a long way from being a bust.

 

[london_bills]

19 minutes ago, jkeerie said:

One thing that cannot be overlooked.  We've seen other QBs get away with "poor decisions"...throwing across their bodies, throwing into coverage...and getting away with it.  Mahomes and Lamar Jackson are among that group.  Their receivers make plays and bail them out.  Instead of getting castigated, their throws end up on highlight reels.  Now before anyone touts that Mahomes and Jackson are better than Josh at this point...I'm not saying he's in their company.  My point is...he doesn't have the receivers to allow him to get away with bad decisions.  I think he needs to put that realization at the top of his lesson plan.

You know what. The deep interceptions and throwing back against the body don't bother me so much. The throwing against the body has worked a few times for big gains.

 

What bothers me is not seeing open receivers (brown and Jones on the 3rd down he missed to beasley). They may have been touchdowns and that's the difference that we expect to see in the future right?

 

Basic intelligence would suggest that New England would think we would go to Beasley on 3rd down. 

[CincyBillsFan]

2 minutes ago, ngbills said:

This is drastically underestimating the mistakes that put the Bills out of field goal range. Those were huge and key in losing the game. 

 

Bills had it at NWE 35 and Allen took bad sack putting them out of range

Bills had it at NWE 25 and Allen took bad sack, pushing FG to a 49 yarder which was missed

Bills had 1st downs around mid field on two of his int's

 

That is a lot of points left on table

 

Fine add a FG to my scenario and we still lose.  BTW we should have made the 49 yard FG.  The only scenario where we DON'T lose is if we switch the performance of the punters.  Switching the performance of the QB's doesn't get us a win becasue you would have to take our TD off the board to mimic Brady's end zone INT.

 

 

[Stallions]

12 hours ago, Shooter McGavin said:

I haven’t given up on Josh as a gamer, leader and a winner, but I have given up on the shred of remaining hope that he’d become a top 10 QB over the next few years.

Me too!

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Fine add a FG to my scenario and we still lose.  BTW we should have made the 49 yard FG.  The only scenario where we DON'T lose is if we switch the performance of the punters.  Switching the performance of the QB's doesn't get us a win becasue you would have to take our TD off the board to mimic Brady's end zone INT.

 

 

 

Not necessarily. A 49 yard field goal is far from automatic.

 

Also, if they'd hit one of them, they wouldn't have gone for it on 4th and goal and would have kicked a 20 yard field goal for the tie. 

[PromoTheRobot]

53 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

How does being benched teach someone how to throw the ball away when under duress? I think you bench Josh if he is disruptive or not putting in the effort needed to get better. I just don't see Josh as a player who needs the message a benching would provide. I think Josh understands the severity of the situation and the issue and I think he works hard to improve his processing. 

 

You need live rounds to learn how to actually make the decisions when under real game conditions. It is frustrating that he is making these bad decisions instead of throwing the ball away. But I just don't see the benefit of benching him providing that he clears the concussion protocol. 

 

I think that if he is hurt or borderline bench him to get him right into the bye week and I think you can win with Barkley managing the game against the Titans. However I don't think he or the team benefits from him being benched. 

 

I also think it is funny that people expect someone to improve almost instantly and with less playing time. Most QB's take time to develop and I think you have to let Josh take his lumps this season as long as he is consistently working to improve. 

 

I don't know.... practice? We have a pretty good defense that could recreate that situation pretty easily.  Josh has a go-to reaction when pressured: backpedal and run to his right to find a receiver along the sideline.  He can't keep being so predictable. So yeah, a little practice working on doing things differently wouldn't hurt. Another benefit of doing it in practice rather than in-game? No film.