Jump to content

Week 15: Bills at Steelers on SNF


YoloinOhio

Recommended Posts

I don't know about any of you, but I CAN'T WAIT for this game! Gonna be hard to hang in there all day waiting for 8:20 to come around, but I'm stoked!  Hope the broadcast will show the Bills celebrating a playoff spot clinch on the field at the end of the game!

Edited by natedogg
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Circlethewagon8404 said:

Ask the Cowboys how that Thanksgiving game went when they had everything riding on that game while at home

I can almost guaranteed they looked past the Bills that game as a easy win at home.

 

Pittsburgh will not. Tomlin>Garrett

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Anxious about our line without Feliciano - well, truthfully, I'm anxious about our line WITH Feliciano, but how do we change it up if he's out?

 

Pretty sure he'll play, but if not I expect to see Long at RG and Ford at RT based on previous subs when Feliciano was out.

 

What I'd be more interested to see though, would be Ford RG and Bates RT to start - can always put Long in at RG and swing Ford back out if Bates can't hold his own either. But it's really a question of who would you rather have blocking TJ Watt and Dupree occasionally...and I don't know that I'm entirely confident in either.

Edited by ctk232
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ctk232 said:

Pretty sure he'll play, but if not I expect to see Long at RG and Ford at RT based on previous subs when Feliciano was out.

 

What I'd be more interested to see though, would be Ford RG and Bates RT to start - can always put Long in at RG and swing Ford back out if Bates can't hold his own either. But it's really a question of who would you rather have blocking TJ Watt and Dupree occasionally...and I don't know that I'm entirely confident in either.

 

TBH, I'd prefer to see the Bills acknowledge that their 5 hosses aren't enough against a team like the Stillers and come out in a 12 set with Smith. 

That of course, depends upon Smith being "locked in" as McDermott says and not becoming a penalty machine.

 

I think if the Bills felt Bates had the potential to be better than Ford right now, he'd play

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, billsbackto81 said:

I can almost guaranteed they looked past the Bills that game as a easy win at home.

 

Pittsburgh will not. Tomlin>Garrett

 

Suuuuure - during a week were the talk was if they lose, their coach might be fired, playing in THE ultimate "eyes on us" timeslot, in their house.  ?

 

Not saying Pittsburgh won't be ready, but, ya know...

  • Like (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

TBH, I'd prefer to see the Bills acknowledge that their 5 hosses aren't enough against a team like the Stillers and come out in a 12 set with Smith. 

That of course, depends upon Smith being "locked in" as McDermott says and not becoming a penalty machine.

 

I think if the Bills felt Bates had the potential to be better than Ford right now, he'd play

No doubt on Bates - I'm more curious than anything, but wouldn't expect it to be a game changing decision. I'd just like to see Ford get inside and showcase what he has there as well, and if Bates could simply sustain the present average play we have with Ford at RT.

 

12 set would certainly help with the rush and hopefully with blitz concepts, but also keep the offense on the field controlling the pace. There was self-criticism from Daboll about not doing more to get in a rhythm, which is what we typically do with the 12/21 personnel sets.

 

There was also a line in the Athletic article going around from Erik Turner that got me thinking. Essentially, that we dialed up more max protect schemes than anything against the Ravens which did help, but overall didn't help Allen's reticence to get the ball out more quickly and scheme receivers open in time to make the throws, regardless of the max protect. Given this, I'd be equally curious whether keeping us in the spread with 54-55 protections would a) force the defense to honor the quick pass receiving threats, given a few completions, and b) force Allen to progress in his reads post-snap, but also give him more options to throw if given a small window of time.

 

It was a bit of everything on Sunday, but if we could have completed a few flat/quick routes against their cover zero/man schemes and even zone blitzes, I think we see the Ravens back off the pressure a bit in the second half. That article points to the go-concept read with Smoke in the flat, and again with Beasley having room to run on the cross field throw and drop by Knox. Given the Still's proclivity and roster talent for similar schemes, I'd be curious to see which Allen would execute more efficiently. All that to say, could very well be neither, too :P but that's why we play the games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ctk232 said:

No doubt on Bates - I'm more curious than anything, but wouldn't expect it to be a game changing decision. I'd just like to see Ford get inside and showcase what he has there as well, and if Bates could simply sustain the present average play we have with Ford at RT.

 

Wait, we're 9-3, we've won 3 of our last 4 games, and you want to change up the entire R side of the OL, just for curiosity?  :rolleyes:

That's what training camp and pre-season are for.

 

Quote

There was also a line in the Athletic article going around from Erik Turner that got me thinking. Essentially, that we dialed up more max protect schemes than anything against the Ravens which did help, but overall didn't help Allen's reticence to get the ball out more quickly and scheme receivers open in time to make the throws, regardless of the max protect.

 

I don't quite understand how to parse this.  I don't think Allen is reticent to get the ball out quickly.  I think either it was a strategic decision to take the longer shots if they were there, or it was Allen's decision, based on a perception of the offense needing to be able to "score a lot" to keep up.   He doesn't need to overcome reticence, he needs to either have a different strategic decision or a different mindset.

 

And how is Allen supposed to scheme receivers open?  Isn't that the job of the play design?  Allen can influence with his eyes, but most of the game the Ravens just weren't worried about little things like that.  They were going on the principle "it's hard to throw completions if you're sitting on your a**"

 

The reason the max protect schemes against the Ravens didn't help as much as one would like, is that Martindale was very good at being deceptive with them, leading to protection breakdowns.

 

The Stillers play a very different defense.  No promises that they wouldn't take a leaf from Martindale's book, but normally their motto is "Football is a man-whupping-man game, and we gonna whup you".  And they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

:lol:

 


Hey Joe -- I'm curious about something.

You seem really certain that the Bills will win the game against the Steelers. I'm curious to know your reasoning. Obviously, the Bills defense should feast on Duck Hodges. Does their defense not worry you, though?

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Logic said:


Hey Joe -- I'm curious about something.

You seem really certain that the Bills will win the game against the Steelers. I'm curious to know your reasoning. Obviously, the Bills defense should feast on Duck Hodges. Does their defense not worry you, though?

 

 

Not especially. They're not blitz-heavy, and Allen plays well against zone. I think we'll only need 14 to win, but we'll get 24.

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Wait, we're 9-3, we've won 3 of our last 4 games, and you want to change up the entire R side of the OL, just for curiosity?  :rolleyes:

That's what training camp and pre-season are for.

 

Ha, I'm most certainly crazy, but not that crazy - it's also based on his spot performance against the Titans and few snaps against Washington. I believe Ford to be the better option in the scenario Feliciano is ever out, as does the staff given our lineup each week, but I have to wonder what Bates could do given his limited showcase thus far. Not trying to change anything up unnecessarily - but if Ford's RT play regresses to that point, it's a viable thought.

 

I don't quite understand how to parse this.  I don't think Allen is reticent to get the ball out quickly.  I think either it was a strategic decision to take the longer shots if they were there, or it was Allen's decision, based on a perception of the offense needing to be able to "score a lot" to keep up.   He doesn't need to overcome reticence, he needs to either have a different strategic decision or a different mindset.

Great point - certainly agree with that assessment.

 

And how is Allen supposed to scheme receivers open?  Isn't that the job of the play design?  Allen can influence with his eyes, but most of the game the Ravens just weren't worried about little things like that.  They were going on the principle "it's hard to throw completions if you're sitting on your a**"

This was in relation to Daboll - he schemed more max protect which, in reference to the article, may have actually impeded Allen's ability to get the ball out more quickly with minimal passing options/effective routes.

 

The reason the max protect schemes against the Ravens didn't help as much as one would like, is that Martindale was very good at being deceptive with them, leading to protection breakdowns.

 

The Stillers play a very different defense.  No promises that they wouldn't take a leaf from Martindale's book, but normally their motto is "Football is a man-whupping-man game, and we gonna whup you".  And they do.

For Martindale, absolutely - but we weren't able to convert quick throws to counter the blitz packages which could have much to do with why they kept blitzing at an unprecedented rate, even for them. No doubt we had issues dealing with the deception, but you can wholly counter any blitz package with effective quick throw routes. Sunday will be a different look for sure, but agreed - it will be much more a matchup game than a scheme battle. I wouldn't be surprised to see some of the diamond front this weekend, either.

 

Edited by ctk232
  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Bills have lost 6 straight to the Steelers.......

 

all of them when the first numeral in the calendar year was 2 and a lot of them were painful losses.

 

It’s time for the Bills to throw some pain back in the Steelers direction.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Not especially. They're not blitz-heavy, and Allen plays well against zone. I think we'll only need 14 to win, but we'll get 24.

 

 

Steelers are not a blitz heavy team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...