Jump to content

If the Bills had had Diggs in 2019


Shaw66

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Huh?  Better game management would have won the game but another stud WR would surely have helped win the game despite the game management.

 

They didn't lose that game for lack of "another stud WR".   You're free to imagine so.  The Texans only needed 1.  The Vikings had 2 and couldn't score against a tough (like the Bills?) 49ers D.

 

They were way up with only 6 minutes in the 3rd.  Then they gave up 8 to just about get to the 4thQ.   What do they do?  5 passes in a row, ending with sack/fumble.  Next possession a 2 pass 3 and out.

 

Daboll got exposed in that game. He is the weakest link, Diggs or no.

 

 

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

8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

They didn't lose that game for lack of "another stud WR".   You're free to imagine so.  The Texans only needed 1.  The Vikings had 2 and couldn't score against a tough (like the Bills?) 49ers D.

 

They were way up with only 6 minutes in the 3rd.  Then they gave up 8 to just about get to the 4thQ.   What do they do?  5 passes in a row, ending with sack/fumble.  Next possession a 2 pass 3 and out.

 

Daboll got exposed in that game. He is the weakest link, Diggs or no.

 

Even though I agree Daboll got exposed, you're saying that a player like Diggs wouldn't have even led to one more point in offense?  That's patently absurd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree with you, on both points. 

 

This notion that the defense collapsed is ridiculous.    Texans had the 12th best offense in the league in yards, 14th best in points, over 23 a game.   The defense held the Texans to 19 in regulation.   That's hardly a collapse.   Moreover, the defense got an absolutely essential three and out before the Bills drove to tie the game, and the defense also got an excellent stop on the Texans' first possession in overtime. 

 

That was hardly a defensive collapse.   An offense like Houston's, witha quarterback like Watson, is going to score some points some of the time.   

Up 16-0 with 6 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter, defense then gave up 19 straight points in a little more than 16 minutes.  That is a collapse.  

Yes the offense needs to get better.  Yes one block by Knox in OT and they win the game.  An explosive WR will help, but defense wins in the playoffs.  They need to get younger at edge/pass rusher and Edmunds needs to continue to get better.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Even though I agree Daboll got exposed, you're saying that a player like Diggs wouldn't have even led to one more point in offense?  That's patently absurd.

 

The Vikings scored 10 points.  Bills scored almost twice that.

 

Assuming one more WR would have been the difference between winning and losing that game is not "patently absurd"?  Come on, doc.  

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

5 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

I agree with you, on both points. 

 

This notion that the defense collapsed is ridiculous.    Texans had the 12th best offense in the league in yards, 14th best in points, over 23 a game.   The defense held the Texans to 19 in regulation.   That's hardly a collapse.   Moreover, the defense got an absolutely essential three and out before the Bills drove to tie the game, and the defense also got an excellent stop on the Texans' first possession in overtime. 

 

That was hardly a defensive collapse.   An offense like Houston's, witha quarterback like Watson, is going to score some points some of the time.   

 

A top 3 D spotted a 16 point lead with 21 minutes to play against a non top 10 Offense giving up 19 is a total collapse---you call it, charitably, "held to 19 in regulation".  

 

 

 

 

 

1 minute ago, LABILLBACKER said:

We would've beaten Houston. That much I can easily predict. 

 

 

Anyone can "easily predict" anything...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

A top 3 D spotted a 16 point lead with 21 minutes to play against a non top 10 Offense giving up 19 is a total collapse---you call it, charitably, "held to 19 in regulation".  

It's a 60--minute game.   Sure it matters when you give up points, but it matters more in terms of psychology than anything else, but that doesn't make it a collapse.   They held the Texans below their offensive average; that is not a collapse.  What happened against the Eagles was a collapse.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

The Vikings scored 10 points.  Bills scored almost twice that.

 

Assuming one more WR would have been the difference between winning and losing that game is not "patently absurd"?  Come on, doc.  

 

What do the Vikings have to do with anything (and do you think the Vikings even score 10 points without Diggs)?  I'm talking about the Bills-Texans game where just 1 more point would have won the game for the Bills in regulation.  Claiming Diggs wouldn't have even provided that is patently absurd and you know it.

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

45 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

It's a 60--minute game.   Sure it matters when you give up points, but it matters more in terms of psychology than anything else, but that doesn't make it a collapse.   They held the Texans below their offensive average; that is not a collapse.  What happened against the Eagles was a collapse.  

 

 

Winners are determined by who held whom to below their seasonal point average.

 

It's simple: can a top hold a 2-3 score lead in the second half of a playoff game?  

33 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

What do the Vikings have to do with anything (and do you think the Vikings even score 10 points without Diggs)?  I'm talking about the Bills-Texans game where just 1 more point would have won the game for the Bills in regulation.  Claiming Diggs wouldn't have even provided that is patently absurd and you know it.

 

The Vikings had 2 stud WRs and still managed 10 points too save their season.  The Bills adding one more to that game doesn't guarantee them the win just because you say so.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Winners are determined by who held whom to below their seasonal point average.

 

It's simple: can a top hold a 2-3 score lead in the second half of a playoff game?  

Can an offense with a top 5 receiver and top 10 quarter back score score 19 points in a half after being shut out?   

 

Bills shut out a really good offense for a half.   They didn't in the second half.   That's not a collapse.  That's getting outplayed in the second half by a good offense, just as much as the defense outplayed their offense in the first half.   No one's calling the the Texans' offensive performance in that game a "collapse."    The defense wasn't quite good enough.   The Bills' offense flat out didn't deliver when it had to.   

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

21 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

Can an offense with a top 5 receiver and top 10 quarter back score score 19 points in a half after being shut out?   

 

Bills shut out a really good offense for a half.   They didn't in the second half.   That's not a collapse.  That's getting outplayed in the second half by a good offense, just as much as the defense outplayed their offense in the first half.   No one's calling the the Texans' offensive performance in that game a "collapse."    The defense wasn't quite good enough.   The Bills' offense flat out didn't deliver when it had to.   

 

 

It's the definition of a collapse, in fact. 

'

The Bills Offense had delivered the D ("top 3") a 16 point late 3rd Q Lead over a slightly above mediocre (not "really good") scoring offense and a 13th ranked QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

The Vikings had 2 stud WRs and still managed 10 points too save their season.  The Bills adding one more to that game doesn't guarantee them the win just because you say so. 

 

 It's not just me WEO.  Most people would say the Bills win that game with Diggs in the lineup.  Now if you had said Sanders...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

It's the definition of a collapse, in fact. 

'

The Bills Offense had delivered the D ("top 3") a 16 point late 3rd Q Lead over a slightly above mediocre (not "really good") scoring offense and a 13th ranked QB.

Bills defense held them to one point fewer than they were scoring on average for the last seven games of the season, and 3 points less than they were scoring in the last 6 games of the season.   Bills defense held them to 40 yards fewer than they were averaging.   And three points they gave up came on a short field created by an Allen fumble.  

 

Defense certainly could have played better.   It was not a collapse.   

 

It's not a collapse when, with the game on the line, on two of Houston's last three possessions, the Bills held them to two three and odds and stopped a fourth down short yardage play.   That's losing, but it's not a collapse.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2020 at 6:09 PM, without a drought said:

I figured out the same thing except I had Diggs taking away targets from Beasley and Brown, which led to fewer catches, yards and TD's for both of them.

Vid but think Josh Allen is better off not getting Diggs last year as it might have caused exceeded expectations. It's also made him develop relations with Brown and Beasley who are going to be as important as Diggs to make Josh and this offense take another step up in his journey to be an above average QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Jokeman said:

Vid but think Josh Allen is better off not getting Diggs last year as it might have caused exceeded expectations. It's also made him develop relations with Brown and Beasley who are going to be as important as Diggs to make Josh and this offense take another step up in his journey to be an above average QB.

That's an interesting point.   

 

Josh has his relationship with Beas and Brown.   Now Diggs can come in, and he knows Brown and Beas are vets and he can trust them.   It will make it easier to roll Diggs into the mix with these pre-existing relationships.    I suppose someone in Brown's position might have preferred to stay the #1 guy - #1 is good for the ego.   But Brown seems like a pretty savvy guy, and I think he knows he isn't a Diggs.  And I think he knows that Diggs will actually be good for him.   

 

Again, I wasn't talking about the practicality of actually adding Diggs last year.   I just wanted to see what his production, added to the production of the team, would have meant to Josh's passer rating.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Doc said:

 

 It's not just me WEO.  Most people would say the Bills win that game with Diggs in the lineup.  Now if you had said Sanders...

 

 

Right...Mr. President.

 

 

15 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Bills defense held them to one point fewer than they were scoring on average for the last seven games of the season, and 3 points less than they were scoring in the last 6 games of the season.   Bills defense held them to 40 yards fewer than they were averaging.   And three points they gave up came on a short field created by an Allen fumble.  

 

Defense certainly could have played better.   It was not a collapse.   

 

It's not a collapse when, with the game on the line, on two of Houston's last three possessions, the Bills held them to two three and odds and stopped a fourth down short yardage play.   That's losing, but it's not a collapse.  

 

 

None of that matters, obviously.  Only what was transpired in that game. A top D doesn't get a special prize for keeping a mediocre Offense under 20.  

 

Look, if these teams were trading leads the whole game, or if the D shut out Texans in the second half after giving up 19 in the first half, you may have a point and it would all be on the Offense.

 

But that's not what happened.  They blew a sizable lead in the latter phase of the game.  That really is the definition of a collapse.  

 

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

On 4/5/2020 at 7:12 PM, Ethan in Portland said:

Defense collapsed against the Texans. Another WR would not have made a difference last year in the playoffs. Diggs maybe gets them one more win but they still are in the WC spot.

Diggs will be huge in 2020 when the schedule is much harder.

 

Maybe they add another field goal when they were up 16 having another play maker there could have been the difference in a game where the margins are so tight. It is also possible the Bills could have won an extra game going into week 17 and been playing for the division possibly against the Jets. Who knows, it is worthless at this point. 

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

I think it makes a dramatic difference  Quickly we forget the board was frothing to have Duke Williams in late in the season  That is how bad the 2nd outside wr production was. I'm certain the efficiency of the offense would have been much greater

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, DuckyBoys said:

I think it makes a dramatic difference  Quickly we forget the board was frothing to have Duke Williams in late in the season  That is how bad the 2nd outside wr production was. I'm certain the efficiency of the offense would have been much greater

 

So would most rational people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Right...Mr. President.

 

 

 

 

None of that matters, obviously.  Only what was transpired in that game. A top D doesn't get a special prize for keeping a mediocre Offense under 20.  

 

Look, if these teams were trading leads the whole game, or if the D shut out Texans in the second half after giving up 19 in the first half, you may have a point and it would all be on the Offense.

 

But that's not what happened.  They blew a sizable lead in the latter phase of the game.  That really is the definition of a collapse.  

 

 

For the most part playoff games are close.  Settling for fgs and not getting Tds decide most playoff games.  There are about 5 plays on offense that costef them the game.  The drop by Williams, and Brown not getting his feet down in bounds come to mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2020 at 7:28 PM, Shaw66 said:

Bills defense held them to one point fewer than they were scoring on average for the last seven games of the season, and 3 points less than they were scoring in the last 6 games of the season.   Bills defense held them to 40 yards fewer than they were averaging.   And three points they gave up came on a short field created by an Allen fumble.  

 

Defense certainly could have played better.   It was not a collapse.   

 

It's not a collapse when, with the game on the line, on two of Houston's last three possessions, the Bills held them to two three and odds and stopped a fourth down short yardage play.   That's losing, but it's not a collapse.  


yea- I get pointing a finger at them but thought they played well enough to win while the offense did not have a good game. 
 

a strong start and weak finish I suppose is by definition a collapse but think they played a much better game than the offense or given credit for 

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

On 4/6/2020 at 5:07 PM, Doc said:

 

 It's not just me WEO.  Most people would say the Bills win that game with Diggs in the lineup.  Now if you had said Sanders...

Majority isn't always right. Weak. Though you may be right. My conclusion is that Diggs would have been so pi$$ed at his QB's running when he was open or having inaccurate passes thrown his way that there may have been chaos

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/6/2020 at 7:07 PM, Doc said:

 

 It's not just me WEO.  Most people would say the Bills win that game with Diggs in the lineup.  Now if you had said Sanders...


their odds definitely go up but it’s not a gimme 

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

7 hours ago, DuckyBoys said:

I think it makes a dramatic difference  Quickly we forget the board was frothing to have Duke Williams in late in the season  That is how bad the 2nd outside wr production was. I'm certain the efficiency of the offense would have been much greater

This is maybe the best way to understand the impact of Diggs.  I was one of those people.   Put Williams in, because maybe he'll do SOMETHING. 


Diggs solves that problem.   If Williams sees the field in 2020, it will be because he got better than what we saw in 2019.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

This is maybe the best way to understand the impact of Diggs.  I was one of those people.   Put Williams in, because maybe he'll do SOMETHING. 


Diggs solves that problem.   If Williams sees the field in 2020, it will be because he got better than what we saw in 2019.    

 

Replace Williams with Diggs and the game is totally different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Replace Williams with Diggs and the game is totally different.

 

We will never know what “coulda been”, I’ll just look forward to what will be! 

 

:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Mat68 said:

 

For the most part playoff games are close.  Settling for fgs and not getting Tds decide most playoff games.  There are about 5 plays on offense that costef them the game.  The drop by Williams, and Brown not getting his feet down in bounds come to mind.

 

FilthyRareBlackwidowspider-mobile.mp4

WastefulTalkativeBighorn-mobile.mp4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Replace Williams with Diggs and the game is totally different.

 

Why?  Because Diggs doesn't drop passes?  

 

Because Diggs is a big time playoff WR?  He had 4 catches and 76 yards in 2 games.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Why?  Because Diggs doesn't drop passes?  

 

Because Diggs is a top 10 receiver and Williams is a CFL castoff. I don't know if you're just being stubborn but anyone who watched the game knows a real #1 WR on the field would have made a big difference. You think Diggs fails to tap his toe at the 5 yard line? That one play single handedly could have changed the outcome.

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

7 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

Because Diggs is a top 10 receiver and Williams is a CFL castoff. I don't know if you're just being stubborn but anyone who watched the game knows a real #1 WR on the field would have made a big difference. You think Diggs fails to tap his toe at the 5 yard line? That one play single handedly could have changed the outcome.

You know, Happy, I've been shooting my mouth off in this thread, all based on what the stats might suggest, and I haven't really been thinking what it mean to have a legitimate #1 receiver.   What it means is things like the toe tap.  It means catching the ball behind him on a 12-yard crossing pattern.   It means beating the DB to the best position to make a play on the ball.   It means catching the ball in space because his last move left the defender in the dirt, or because the corner was forced to give him a cushion.  

 

There are a lot plays, I'd say two to five a game, that you'll predictably get from Diggs that the Bills would only occasionally get from the receivers they had last season.   

 

As an aside, I think you're unfair to Duke.  He wasn't a CFL castoff.   He led the league; he was a CFL graduate, not a drop out.   Still, that doesn't change the fact that he wasn't an impact player in 2019.  

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

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

Because Diggs is a top 10 receiver and Williams is a CFL castoff. I don't know if you're just being stubborn but anyone who watched the game knows a real #1 WR on the field would have made a big difference. You think Diggs fails to tap his toe at the 5 yard line? That one play single handedly could have changed the outcome.

 

 

Diggs has never been a top 10 receiver.  Even without Thielen most of the season, he didn't crack the top 15 in yards or the top 40 in receptions.

 

But sure,  more good players is always a good thing.  But to say the putting Diggs in that game results in a win without a doubt is fantasy.  Were you watching the Vikings playoffs games saying, "man, if only we had that guy against the Texans"?  He was a nonfactor in the Saints game (had a tantrum) and against the 49ers he contributed to a 10 point output Offense.

 

Nobody was watching those games and thinking that.  

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

33 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

Diggs has never been a top 10 receiver.  Even without Thielen most of the season, he didn't crack the top 15 in yards or the top 40 in receptions.

 

But sure,  more good players is always a good thing.  But to say the putting Diggs in that game results in a win without a doubt is fantasy.  Were you watching the Vikings playoffs games saying, "man, if only we had that guy against the Texans"?  He was a nonfactor in the Saints game (had a tantrum) and against the 49ers he contributed to a 10 point output Offense.

 

Nobody was watching those games and thinking that.  

 

What are you talking about?  Thielen played in 10 games last year.  That's not "missing most of the season."  And he had just 418 yards, which works out to 668 yards for the season.  Amazing.  Prior to Digg's arrival he was an UDFA who was helped by Diggs' presence and even he admits he'll miss him.

 

And Diggs was top-10 in yards/game (he's a WR you see and he didn't play the final game of the season).  The only thing that's fantasy is clinging to the laughable notion that Diggs wouldn't have made any difference at all in that game, given the poor WR play.  But we know you have to believe that because you think Sanders was the Bills' top target (another laughable notion) and Diggs is some scrub they had to settle for.

 

And hey, the 2017 Vikings-Saints game is calling...

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

7 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

What are you talking about?  Thielen played in 10 games last year.  That's not "missing most of the season."  And he had just 418 yards, which works out to 668 yards for the season.  Amazing.  Prior to Digg's arrival he was an UDFA who was helped by Diggs' presence and even he admits he'll miss him.

 

And Diggs was top-10 in yards/game (he's a WR you see and he didn't play the final game of the season).  The only thing that's fantasy is clinging to the laughable notion that Diggs wouldn't have made any difference at all in that game, given the poor WR play.  But we know you have to believe that because you think Sanders was the Bills' top target (another laughable notion) and Diggs is some scrub they had to settle for.

 

And hey, the 2017 Vikings-Saints game is calling...

 

 

LOL ok doc...in "yards per game" he was 11th.

 

In the games where he didn't;'t have to complete with Thielen for targets, he had 2 games over 80 yards.  Thielen by the way, in the 2 previous seasons, was an ACTAUL top 10 WR in yards and catches. 

 

Again, the bolded part I didn't say.  But keep repeating and you'll get that big bad straw man!   Were you really watching the Vikings playoffs and saying that isn the Bills had Diggs they absolutely without a doubt win the Texans game?  No, you were not.

 

2017 Vikings-Saints game is calling....and 2019 Vikings-Saint game answers and says:  "what do you want?".

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr. WEO said:

Diggs has never been a top 10 receiver.

 

I think you're wrong about that.   Over his five seasons in the league, he's clearly one of the ten best.    365 catches for 4263 yards.    70+ catches, 800+ yards a season.  

 

Clearly better are Michael Thomas, Julio Jones, Hopkins.  Those three guys have consistently put up 1200-1400 yard seasons.

 

 More or less a statistical push are Keenan Allen, Amari Cooper, Mike Evans and OBJ.   Over five years they aren't much different.   

 

Definitely top 10.  

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

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

Because Diggs is a top 10 receiver and Williams is a CFL castoff. I don't know if you're just being stubborn but anyone who watched the game knows a real #1 WR on the field would have made a big difference. You think Diggs fails to tap his toe at the 5 yard line? That one play single handedly could have changed the outcome.


while odds are he performs better you just don’t know. Is Diggs double covered and josh forces it in for an INT instead of an incompletion?

 

im 100% on board we are a better team with him. I’m not full steam on picking plays to flip and saying “see, that simple” essentially for why we would definitely win with him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...