THE ROCKPILE REVIEW - December Football

[stuvian]

and one of our TEs scored a red zone TD!

[Giuseppe Tognarelli]

What intrigues me is that we have yet to see Playoff Allen. Who knows for what we are in store.

[Shaw66]

4 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Explain the Cleveland game then?  Same scenario, however a TD and you lose, a second year QB too.  

 

They gave Pitt 2 chances to tie the game and did win but were too conservative imo.

 

As for Josh, he had multiple Int games vs. the Jets & Pats & to keep saying he is making bad decisions, throwing into coverage or high is again feeding a narrative that is wrong.

 

The Bills won, but imo were again way too conservative.

 

BTW watch NO yesterday?  Sure looked like passing & 300 yards is fun to me.

No strategy works all the time.  It didn't work in Cleveland.  

 

I keep saying the same thing here, over and over.   McDermott and Beane have a long-term plan, and they're sticking to it.   Their primary objective is not to win this year, it's to build a team that can have sustained long-term success.   Part of that success will come from building in a way that supports sustained long-term success.  So, for example, someone asked the other day whether Beane regrets not getting more free agent talent this year.  I said no, I doubt he does, because going all in on talent to win this year isn't in the plan.  The plan is to build talent you can teach and keep.  

 

I think McDermott would tell you that taking unnecessary risks to win a game this year isn't consistent with his long term plan.   Putting his QB in a situation where, given his current development, he could blow the game, isn't consistent with building a winner.  I think he'd tell you that Allen needs to keep learning, and as he does he will be more trustworthy in late-game situations.   Does McDermott want to be more aggressive offensively in those situations?   I think he wants the option to be more aggressive, for sure.  But he knows what his QB does well and does not so well right now, and his defense is simply more reliable.  

 

Now, if my defense sucked, sure, I'd say let's take out best shot, meaning maybe our big QB with the big arm will make a play for us.   That might work, but it might also blow up.   In a situation like the Bills are in, where your defense is giving up very few points and where it increasingly is showing the mental and physical toughness to get stops when they really need it, relying on the defense is a higher probability play AND it's consistent with the long-term growth of the team.  

 

When Drew Brees was in his second season, the Chargers let him throw the ball 40 times a game and they finished 8-8.   Why?  Because they were 27th in the league in yards defense and 30th in the league in scoring defense, so they weren't going to rely on their defense to win games and they let the kid sling it.   The Bills are in the top of the league in defense and, like the Chargers in 2002, have a gifted but inexperienced QB and a mediocre offense - with that combination it's foolish to ask your offense to win games rather than your defense.   

 

When Allen has the experience and savvy that Brees has, it will be a different story, but we tend to forget that players like Brees weren't always as good as they are now.  After his third full season starting, the Chargers drafted Eli Manning and acquired Rivers, and Brees was gone a year later.  He was NOT a guy the Chargers wanted to rely on to win games.   

[yungmack]

A most excellent essay, Shaw. Your insight on the D was especially on the money. It looked as good as any I've see this year. Smokin' good.

[Billsfan1972]

2 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

No strategy works all the time.  It didn't work in Cleveland.  

 

I keep saying the same thing here, over and over.   McDermott and Beane have a long-term plan, and they're sticking to it.   Their primary objective is not to win this year, it's to build a team that can have sustained long-term success.   Part of that success will come from building in a way that supports sustained long-term success.  So, for example, someone asked the other day whether Beane regrets not getting more free agent talent this year.  I said no, I doubt he does, because going all in on talent to win this year isn't in the plan.  The plan is to build talent you can teach and keep.  

 

I think McDermott would tell you that taking unnecessary risks to win a game this year isn't consistent with his long term plan.   Putting his QB in a situation where, given his current development, he could blow the game, isn't consistent with building a winner.  I think he'd tell you that Allen needs to keep learning, and as he does he will be more trustworthy in late-game situations.   Does McDermott want to be more aggressive offensively in those situations?   I think he wants the option to be more aggressive, for sure.  But he knows what his QB does well and does not so well right now, and his defense is simply more reliable.  

 

Now, if my defense sucked, sure, I'd say let's take out best shot, meaning maybe our big QB with the big arm will make a play for us.   That might work, but it might also blow up.   In a situation like the Bills are in, where your defense is giving up very few points and where it increasingly is showing the mental and physical toughness to get stops when they really need it, relying on the defense is a higher probability play AND it's consistent with the long-term growth of the team.  

 

When Drew Brees was in his second season, the Chargers let him throw the ball 40 times a game and they finished 8-8.   Why?  Because they were 27th in the league in yards defense and 30th in the league in scoring defense, so they weren't going to rely on their defense to win games and they let the kid sling it.   The Bills are in the top of the league in defense and, like the Chargers in 2002, have a gifted but inexperienced QB and a mediocre offense - with that combination it's foolish to ask your offense to win games rather than your defense.   

 

When Allen has the experience and savvy that Brees has, it will be a different story, but we tend to forget that players like Brees weren't always as good as they are now.  After his third full season starting, the Chargers drafted Eli Manning and acquired Rivers, and Brees was gone a year later.  He was NOT a guy the Chargers wanted to rely on to win games.   

Again if this is a log-term plan, then you let Allen throw & see exactly what you have as he is the long-term future.  They don't because they have no idea (imo) how to utilize him.  

 

What they did at the end of the half & both possessions after getting the lead is not because of any long-term plan, it is because they they have little need for the offensive side of the ball.  

 

Vs. Cleveland they too decided that a 53 yard fg to tie the game was their best shot too, as opposed to being better prepared & going for the TD.

 

We've seen for 3 years little go into that side of the game.  

 

To think that vs. Pitt was different then it would be against any opponent or QB is wrong.  McD's philosophy for game planning is etched in stone.   

 

  

[chaccof]

23 hours ago, Logic said:

Me too.

That game last night was an absolute beauty. Give me a 17-10, old school slugfest over a 51-48 shootout all day, everyday. 

The problem with defensive football is that, unlike a good old fashion blow out where I can get up, go to the bathroom, hit the fridge, not have to where my hat a certain way, etc. I have to sit there, nearly peeing my pants, making sure not to change my position in my chair, all in hopes of not causing the Bills to lose.

[Billsfan1972]

23 hours ago, Logic said:

Me too.

That game last night was an absolute beauty. Give me a 17-10, old school slugfest over a 51-48 shootout all day, everyday. 

I remember all that outrage over the Rams Chiefs game last year or NO vs. SF two Sundays ago......

 

Sorry the best Bills game I ever saw was the No Punt game vs. SF September 13, 1992......

 

I really get tired of people deriding offensive explosions and high scoring games.

 

Maybe the Cleveland 6-3 games was the best you ever saw?  It was a defensive struggle also called the worst game ever......

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/270428-worst-game-ever-buffalo-vs-cleveland-review

[Shaw66]

18 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Again if this is a log-term plan, then you let Allen throw & see exactly what you have as he is the long-term future.  They don't because they have no idea (imo) how to utilize him.  

 

What they did at the end of the half & both possessions after getting the lead is not because of any long-term plan, it is because they they have little need for the offensive side of the ball.  

 

Vs. Cleveland they too decided that a 53 yard fg to tie the game was their best shot too, as opposed to being better prepared & going for the TD.

 

We've seen for 3 years little go into that side of the game.  

 

To think that vs. Pitt was different then it would be against any opponent or QB is wrong.  McD's philosophy for game planning is etched in stone.   

 

  

I think you'll see you're wrong.  

 

McDermott is all about winning.  He is going to do everything that will make the team a consistent winner, including on the offense.   

 

Next year's offense will have better talent, a more mature QB, and it will be more aggressive.  

7 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

I remember all that outrage over the Rams Chiefs game last year or NO vs. SF two Sundays ago......

 

Sorry the best Bills game I ever saw was the No Punt game vs. SF September 13, 1992......

 

I really get tired of people deriding offensive explosions and high scoring games.

 

Maybe the Cleveland 6-3 games was the best you ever saw?  It was a defensive struggle also called the worst game ever......

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/270428-worst-game-ever-buffalo-vs-cleveland-review

I'm kind of with you here.  Defense is great, and I love defensive games, but the no punt game was incredible.   Cleveland 6-3 was also incredible, but very difficult to watch. 

[Billsfan1972]

I do like your analysis and you do a great job.  However I think McD is all about the D & has has blind spot with respect to offense as there is no reason it could not have been better this year (a perfect signing forgetting his 4 game suspension would have been Golden Tate). 

 

BTW How else do you explain the Nathan Peterman experiment, not once, but twice?????

[Figster]

1 hour ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Again if this is a log-term plan, then you let Allen throw & see exactly what you have as he is the long-term future.  They don't because they have no idea (imo) how to utilize him.  

 

What they did at the end of the half & both possessions after getting the lead is not because of any long-term plan, it is because they they have little need for the offensive side of the ball.  

 

Vs. Cleveland they too decided that a 53 yard fg to tie the game was their best shot too, as opposed to being better prepared & going for the TD.

 

We've seen for 3 years little go into that side of the game.  

 

To think that vs. Pitt was different then it would be against any opponent or QB is wrong.  McD's philosophy for game planning is etched in stone.   

 

  

Speaking of the Browns, letting Mayfield throw to see what you have despite having a boatload of talent around him caused a very talented team to miss the playoffs in my humble opinion. Chubb is one of the best RB's in the league and the Browns should have rode him into the playoffs.

 

Out of the great QB class of 2018 its no coincidence IMO the 2 QB's taking their team to the playoffs have both been well managed, have good D's backing them up, and for the most part have not been asked to carry the team throwing the football.

 

Myself personally, a very strategic and well balanced approach to Allens development is a big reason why Buffalo is 10 - 4 and headed to the playoffs.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Figster

[SCBills]

For as frustrating as it is, I think McDermott is on the mark with how he and Daboll are bringing along Allen.  We have solid talent on the Offensive side, but no gamebreakers outside of Allen's "potential". 

 

That deep flick of the wrist 50/50 ball to John Brown should be a staple of this offense with Allen's arm, but it's tough to do that throwing primarily to Brown/Beasley and Knox.  Still holding out hope we see someone emerge from the Kroft/Foster/McKenzie/Roberts grouping to give us one more receiving option heading into the Playoffs. 

 

Where I do believe McDermott and Daboll should be more aggressive with Allen is in the red zone.  He's an absolute monster in that area of the field and has done nothing to warrant a possession of 3 straight runs and kick a FG. 

 

I also believe some of this is the opponent.... I can say with almost certainty that the coaches have a good feel for the game and if they know they need more points, will allow for more aggressiveness.  Against the Steeler Offense, they knew 17 points would win us the game, and were correct.

 

 

Edited December 17, 2019 by SCBills

[Shaw66]

23 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

I do like your analysis and you do a great job.  However I think McD is all about the D & has has blind spot with respect to offense as there is no reason it could not have been better this year (a perfect signing forgetting his 4 game suspension would have been Golden Tate). 

 

BTW How else do you explain the Nathan Peterman experiment, not once, but twice?????

Second question first.  How do I explain Peterman?   McDermott saw things in practice he liked.   He thought it would work.   It didn't.    First Peterman, McDermott didn't like Taylor.  He didn't execute he offense the way he was supposed to.  Peterman did it in practice, and McDermott wants guys who execute the system.   Plus, the team wasn't playing well.  So he tried Peterman.  Second time, McDermott really wanted his rookie on the sidelines, not on the field.   By the time they got to the first game of the season, Peterman was the only option.   So McD tried it, and it failed.  So he went with Allen.   McD knew that the 2018 season wasn't going to be a loser; he told us before the season started.  So he hoped he get something out of Peterman just to protect the rookie.   Made sense. 

 

In any case, it was a poor choice.  But all coaches make mistakes, and all young coaches especially.   He's learning, just like everyone else.  

 

First question.  Does he have a blind spot?  Absolutely not.  I don't think you've been listening to and about McDermott.  McDermott has been studying to be a head coach for 20 years.   He has a few hundred notebooks full of information about coaching.   He's a student of the game.   One of the things he says is that it's a three-phase game, and all three phases have to complement each other.   He doesn't say it's one or two phases, it's all three.   

 

And McDermott's system is evaluation.  Everything gets evaluated all the time, including the offense.   There is not possible way, zero, that he has a blind spot as to the offense.   No way in the world.   

 

This offense is a year away.  They improved the o line with a bunch of journeymen players this year, but they aren't close to done.   They have a QB who has improved tremendously but still looks like a rookie some of the time.  They have mediocre receivers.   They have an offensive coordinator who is learning the job too.   They all will be better next season because McD's system demands that everyone get better and figures out how to do it.   That's what he's doing here.   The offense isn't good enough, not because McDermott isn't paying attention, but because it has exactly one player carried over from two years ago (Dawkins), and he isn't great.   They have a second-year OC and a second-year QB.   

 

If you have a mediocre offense and a great defense, it makes complete sense to prefer having the defense on the field when the game is on the line.   As I said in earlier posts, and for the reasons I gave in the preceding paragraph, next season it will be different, and next season you will see McDermott be more aggressive with the offense on the field.  

[LABILLBACKER]

Shaw the team was prepared defensively but struggled again on offense. With 3 timeouts and 1:53 on the clock, Sean decided to call it a half. With 7:55 left we allowed the Steelers 3 more possessions and chances to tie. All year I've waited patiently for our offense to pick up the defense. Its yet to happen this season.  

[Logic]

1 hour ago, Billsfan1972 said:

 

 

Maybe the Cleveland 6-3 games was the best you ever saw?  It was a defensive struggle also called the worst game ever......

 

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/270428-worst-game-ever-buffalo-vs-cleveland-review

Nope.

There's a big difference between a defensive struggle and two putrid offenses trying to out-crap each other. I was at that Browns-Bills game, and it was the latter, not the former. Everybody knew it. ESPN even showed only punts on their "highlights" from the game, because it was just two historically crappy teams trying to out-crap each other. It was NOT a defensive struggle.

Sunday night's game against the Steelers, though? THAT was a defensive struggle, and it was awesome. 

People can be entertained by whatever they want. Me, personally? I'm entertained by hard-hitting, every-play-matters, black and blue slugfests, and those usually come in games where two teams with great defenses square off. Seeing which team can impose their physical will on the other more effectively is what football is all about, and that's what the SNF game two nights ago offered.

 

[Shaw66]

5 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

 Its yet to happen this season.  

I've been saying for more than a year that it is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN THIS SEASON. 

 

Read what I just wrote up above.  This is an offense with mediocre talent everywhere except QB and center, and it's actually an improvement over the offense a year ago.  The 2019 offense isn't and never was expected to be a power house or a top-10 offense.   That's coming, but not this year.   

4 minutes ago, Logic said:

 Seeing which team can impose their physical will on the other more effectively is what football is all about, and that's what the SNF game two nights ago offered.

 

You're right about this.   Watching that game, and the Ravens game, made me realize I've forgotten what football is about.  It's two teams of 11, one trying to acquire territory, the other trying to protect territory.  It's a a territorial war.  Sunday night and the Ravens game was 11 on 11 battle - if you didn't hit and tackle every play, you lost.  It was a desperate fight, every play, to acquire and defend territory.  

 

The wide-open passing games with high scores are more like modern, remote control or video war.  

[Billsfan1972]

38 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

Shaw the team was prepared defensively but struggled again on offense. With 3 timeouts and 1:53 on the clock, Sean decided to call it a half. With 7:55 left we allowed the Steelers 3 more possessions and chances to tie. All year I've waited patiently for our offense to pick up the defense. Its yet to happen this season.  

And that is Shaw's blind spot too?.....  He explains everything away & McD made the right call even if the end result failed.....  However 10-4 is not bad, however as other's have noted 2020 will be a much sterner test.

 

Give McD credit where credit is due, the team did not take games off & won the games they were supposed to (Miami, NYJx1, Wash, NYG, Denver, Cincy) & won road games vs. Tenn, Dallas & Pitt all of whom were caught at thje right time.

34 minutes ago, Logic said:

Nope.

There's a big difference between a defensive struggle and two putrid offenses trying to out-crap each other. I was at that Browns-Bills game, and it was the latter, not the former. Everybody knew it. ESPN even showed only punts on their "highlights" from the game, because it was just two historically crappy teams trying to out-crap each other. It was NOT a defensive struggle.

Sunday night's game against the Steelers, though? THAT was a defensive struggle, and it was awesome. 

People can be entertained by whatever they want. Me, personally? I'm entertained by hard-hitting, every-play-matters, black and blue slugfests, and those usually come in games where two teams with great defenses square off. Seeing which team can impose their physical will on the other more effectively is what football is all about, and that's what the SNF game two nights ago offered.

 

On the Bills side of D maybe (against a bad QB).  To me the Offense turtled and was afraid to impose their will. 

30 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I've been saying for more than a year that it is NOT GOING TO HAPPEN THIS SEASON. 

 

Read what I just wrote up above.  This is an offense with mediocre talent everywhere except QB and center, and it's actually an improvement over the offense a year ago.  The 2019 offense isn't and never was expected to be a power house or a top-10 offense.   That's coming, but not this year.   

And I say they are not trying & we see it in the play calling over & over.  Even the worst offenses in the NFL can throw for 300 yards is case in point.

 

BTW the quicker we see what the Bills have in Allen the better......

Edited December 17, 2019 by Billsfan1972

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, Billsfan1972 said:

And that is Shaw's blind spot too?.....  He explains everything away & McD made the right call even if the end result failed.....  However 10-4 is not bad, however as other's have noted 2020 will be a much sterner test.

 

Give McD credit where credit is due, the team did not take games off & won the games they were supposed to (Miami, NYJx1, Wash, NYG, Denver, Cincy) & won road games vs. Tenn, Dallas & Pitt all of whom were caught at thje right time.

On the Bills side of D maybe (against a bad QB).  To me the Offense turtled and was afraid to impose their will. 

And I say they are not trying & we see it in the play calling over & over.  Even the worst offenses in the NFL can throw for 300 yards is case in point.

 

BTW the quicker we see what the Bills have in Allen the better......

Quicker is not how they're building. They never were about a quick turnaround.   They've told us that for years.   They're building for sustained long-term success, and that approach sacrifices short-term performance.   If you understood that's what they're doing, you'd understand it's unreasonable to expect high-end performance this year. 

 

And the Bills already know what they have in Allen.   He's one of the best QBs in the league over the next ten years, absent injury.   

 

It's always been about 2021 and beyond, not this season.    Every win after the Steeler game, including wins in the playoffs, is gravy.  

[Billsfan1972]

15 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Quicker is not how they're building. They never were about a quick turnaround.   They've told us that for years.   They're building for sustained long-term success, and that approach sacrifices short-term performance.   If you understood that's what they're doing, you'd understand it's unreasonable to expect high-end performance this year. 

 

And the Bills already know what they have in Allen.   He's one of the best QBs in the league over the next ten years, absent injury.   

 

It's always been about 2021 and beyond, not this season.    Every win after the Steeler game, including wins in the playoffs, is gravy.  

That's coach speak for "Don't blame us if we suck".....  

 

Look how quick SF has turned it around.  Many examples.

 

If they know what they have in Allen, then let him loose every once in a while.  The Baltimore game was just horrendous when it came to the play calling as he was under pressure all game and seemingly no adjustments..  

 

These <200 yard games are just way too common.

 

Remember I think Allen is the real deal, but these games we see over & over are 100% (at least 90%) on the coaching. 

 

 

[Shaw66]

2 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

 

 

Look how quick SF has turned it around.  Many examples.

 

 

SF has the guy who was generally regarded as the best young offensive coach in the league, and they have a QB who studied under Belichick and McDaniel for four or five years before coming to SF.   Even with that, Garoppolo has thrown for only 600 more yards than Allen, and Garoppolo is playing in much better weather.  

 

I get that you don't like it.  To expect that McDermott will take your approach over the approach he has chosen doesn't make sense.  Do you want to fire McDermott?  If not, live with it. 

[Billsfan1972]

3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

SF has the guy who was generally regarded as the best young offensive coach in the league, and they have a QB who studied under Belichick and McDaniel for four or five years before coming to SF.   Even with that, Garoppolo has thrown for only 600 more yards than Allen, and Garoppolo is playing in much better weather.  

 

I get that you don't like it.  To expect that McDermott will take your approach over the approach he has chosen doesn't make sense.  Do you want to fire McDermott?  If not, live with it. 

And again I will then point to a team that thought they had it all figured out......  The 2017 Jacksonville Jaguars.  The #2 defense in the league that should have gone to the SB (if they didn't crumble in the 4th vs. NE) with a QB drafted 3rd overall...... And what has happened to them (Offense & Defense) since then?

 

We do not have a crystal ball & as I've said over & over I HATE the Offensive philosophy & think they are a lot better then they are allowed to show (or are coached).

Edited December 18, 2019 by Billsfan1972