Dimarco PT

[dbfla10]

Does anyone know or where to get information on how often Dimarco is on the field. I wonder if the Bills running game is that much better with him out there. I wonder cause he takes a roster spot. Teams are starting to use ST LBs, and TEs as a FB to save a spot. May be worth a look. 

[JerseyBills]

I agree but McDermott values his leadership very highly . 

I'd guess around 20-25%.  Maybe lower

Especially since in the last half of season when Dabol started going 3 wide like 80% of the time 

[Brennan Huff]

All I know is there should never be a play call for 4th and long in the 4th quarter of a playoff game where Allen is chucking the ball up for Dimarco in double coverage. I’m sure that not how the play was drawn up but he shouldn’t have even been on the field..

Edited May 1, 2020 by Brennan Huff

[Gugny]

15 minutes ago, Brennan Huff said:

All I know is there should never be a play call for 4th and long in the 4th quarter of a playoff game where Allen is chucking the ball up for Dimarco in double coverage. I’m sure that not how the play was drawn up but he shouldn’t have even been on the field..

 

Actually, it was the perfect play call with the perfect personnel on the field.  It was simply poorly executed.

[JaBu]

2 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Actually, it was the perfect play call with the perfect personnel on the field.  It was simply poorly executed.

 

...and well defensed by Houston, not fooled.

[DJB]

31 minutes ago, dbfla10 said:

Does anyone know or where to get information on how often Dimarco is on the field. I wonder if the Bills running game is that much better with him out there. I wonder cause he takes a roster spot. Teams are starting to use ST LBs, and TEs as a FB to save a spot. May be worth a look. 

 

https://www.lineups.com/nfl/snap-counts/buffalo-bills-snap-counts

[Brennan Huff]

8 minutes ago, Gugny said:

 

Actually, it was the perfect play call with the perfect personnel on the field.  It was simply poorly executed.

agree to disagree 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/buf/2019-snap-counts.htm

 

[CBD]

15.53% of offensive snaps. 37.68% of specs snaps

 

 

 

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DiMaPa00/fantasy/2019

Edited May 1, 2020 by CBD

[T master]

I like the fact that the Bills have a FB on the roster when he was brought in from ATL he was held as 1 of the best in the league i just wish they would use him more as a weapon like the 9ers use their FB (I'd spell his name but don't have a clue) .

 

All the so called "Experts" say the running game is no longer relevant in the NFL but it seems that every team that wins the SB has a pretty dam good running game just saying . Then there's the thing of a RB by commity which sure it's great for those guys to have less wear & tear but i miss those games the a back just catches his groove at like 25+ carries & it could still be that way .

 

Henry last year for the Titans is a NFL rarity now and they say his type don't exist any more but i'm sure the Bus & others disagree i think the entire RB by commity is more to have a different plan of attack than it is because the RB's can't play more plays these guys have a lot more technology about nutrition, and health than they ever use to so i think RB's could play as much as they use to it's just not what the evolution of coaching has in mind for the future of the NFL RB . 

[Logic]

I once read a smart quote -- I wish I could find it, but I can't -- stating that all NFL offensive systems either have fullbacks or they don't. You almost never see a system that features a fullback suddenly get rid of it all together, and you almost never see an offense that DOESN'T feature a fullback suddenly add one.

Well...Daboll's offense has a fullback. As long as Brian Daboll is the offensive coordinator of the Buffalo Bills, they'll carry a fullback. For what it's worth, I believe that Sean McDermott believes in the importance of having one on the roster, too. 

You can argue that a fullback isn't worth the roster spot, but I don't think the coaching staff would agree. By playing tons of special teams snaps and providing blocking goal line and short yardage situations, the fullback provides at least as much value as, say, the WR5 or RB3.

The question, then, becomes "is DiMarco the best guy for the job?". I know that the staff values his leadership, especially now that Gore is gone from the running back room. I believe they also respect his quality special teams contributions and leadership to that unit. The only player who has a chance of pushing him off the roster is the UDFA they brought in, Reggie Gilliam, who, as I understand it, is faster and can also catch passes. But can he block as well as DiMarco? Can he play special teams as well as DiMarco? Are the Bills willing to lose DiMarco's leadership? Time will tell.

[Mr. WEO]

17 minutes ago, Logic said:

I once read a smart quote -- I wish I could find it, but I can't -- stating that all NFL offensive systems either have fullbacks or they don't. You almost never see a system that features a fullback suddenly get rid of it all together, and you almost never see an offense that DOESN'T feature a fullback suddenly add one.

Well...Daboll's offense has a fullback. As long as Brian Daboll is the offensive coordinator of the Buffalo Bills, they'll carry a fullback. For what it's worth, I believe that Sean McDermott believes in the importance of having one on the roster, too. 

You can argue that a fullback isn't worth the roster spot, but I don't think the coaching staff would agree. By playing tons of special teams snaps and providing blocking goal line and short yardage situations, the fullback provides at least as much value as, say, the WR5 or RB3.

The question, then, becomes "is DiMarco the best guy for the job?". I know that the staff values his leadership, especially now that Gore is gone from the running back room. I believe they also respect his quality special teams contributions and leadership to that unit. The only player who has a chance of pushing him off the roster is the UDFA they brought in, Reggie Gilliam, who, as I understand it, is faster and can also catch passes. But can he block as well as DiMarco? Can he play special teams as well as DiMarco? Are the Bills willing to lose DiMarco's leadership? Time will tell.

 

He only played 15% of the snaps.  Their 2 RBs combined for 4 rushing TDs.  The Special Teams is bottom half.

 

He's not contributing on the field in a manner that justifies another year on the roster.  Leadership doesn't count---this isn't a team struggling in the locker room.

Edited May 1, 2020 by Mr. WEO

[Logic]

17 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

He only played 15% of the snaps.  Their 2 RBs combined for 4 rushing TDs.  The Special Teams is bottom half.

 

He's not contributing on the field in a manner that justifies another year on the roster.  Leadership doesn't count---this isn't a team struggling in the locker room.

Like I said: rarely do offenses who typically roster fullbacks suddenly stop doing so.

Are you advocating that they don't roster a fullback AT ALL? Because I don't think that's going to happen. Their addition of a UDFA at the position backs up this point. They added competition at the position. Not exactly an indication that they want to phase it out altogether.

Are you advocating that DiMarco, specifically, be replaced? If so, who do you suggest?

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

Actually, it was the perfect play call with the perfect personnel on the field.  It was simply poorly executed.

 

We got you there in the end  

2 hours ago, Brennan Huff said:

agree to disagree 

 

Gug agrees with you. He is being sarcastic. 

 

I think you are both wrong. We ended up with Houston doubling Di Marco and Smith. From that point on the numbers on the rest of the field are firmly in the Bills favour. To lose the down from that point is pretty inept football. 

[Brennan Huff]

3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We got you there in the end  

 

Gug agrees with you. He is being sarcastic. 

 

I think you are both wrong. We ended up with Houston doubling Di Marco and Smith. From that point on the numbers on the rest of the field are firmly in the Bills favour. To lose the down from that point is pretty inept football. 

I have refused to watch this game or any of the highlights because it just hurts too much. All I remember is smith and dimarco out there running routes and I threw my beer can at the tv. They should not have even been out there. We have legit weapons now. You need your best receivers on the field, and those 2 were arguably at the very bottom of the bunch at that point 

[Happy]

54 minutes ago, Logic said:

Like I said: rarely do offenses who typically roster fullbacks suddenly stop doing so.

Are you advocating that they don't roster a fullback AT ALL? Because I don't think that's going to happen. Their addition of a UDFA at the position backs up this point. They added competition at the position. Not exactly an indication that they want to phase it out altogether.

Are you advocating that DiMarco, specifically, be replaced? If so, who do you suggest?

 

I think it's fine to roster a fullback, just use them properly.  Look at what SF has done with  Kyle Jusczyk, who is an effective weapon.  The way Daboll has managed the fullback position has been a travesty.

[GunnerBill]

44 minutes ago, Brennan Huff said:

I have refused to watch this game or any of the highlights because it just hurts too much. All I remember is smith and dimarco out there running routes and I threw my beer can at the tv. They should not have even been out there. We have legit weapons now. You need your best receivers on the field, and those 2 were arguably at the very bottom of the bunch at that point 

 

Them running routes meant their best receiver - John Brown was 1v1 on a crossing route. The play was designed to go there. He got jammed off the line was late getting to his spot. The line failed to buy that extra half second against what as ostensibly a 3 man rush and Josh bailed on the play a split second too early (another half second and Brown is open for a big gainer) and chucked it up to the double covered Di Marco. The play call was fine and the Texans fell for it. The execution really sucked.

[BuffaloMatt]

Covid-19 sucks

[AlCowlingsTaxiService]

He’s our secret playoff weapon deep threat ?

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

3 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

Actually, it was the perfect play call with the perfect personnel on the field.  It was simply poorly executed.

I know right. “Lee, Pat, you guy run 9’s on those safeties” they’ll” never expect it. 
 

If they blitz maybe John Brown can come in and block. 17D chess

[Cheektowaga Chad]

3 hours ago, jabu said:

 

...and well defensed by Houston, not fooled.

Everyone questions why Allen was heaving a prayer to a double covered full back but what is houston thinking to double cover a full back lol

 

The play was truly one of a kind

[Freddie's Dead]

DiMarco is breasts on a bull.

[Capco]

4 hours ago, Brennan Huff said:

All I know is there should never be a play call for 4th and long in the 4th quarter of a playoff game where Allen is chucking the ball up for Dimarco in double coverage. I’m sure that not how the play was drawn up but he shouldn’t have even been on the field..

 

Tbf, wheel routes run by FBs are never a primary target on a given play.  For example, if a linebacker chooses to blitz upon reading a certain protection, that might give the FB a chance to run the route uncovered.  Certain zone coverage shells will also have soft spots for a receiver running a wheel route.  

 

If DiMarco was doubled covered and Allen threw the ball to him, that's not DiMarco's fault or Daboll's fault (at least I assume Daboll wouldn't have a FB as his primary read).  That has nothing to do with whether or not DiMarco should have been on the field and everything to do with Allen making a poor decision.  

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

5 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Tbf, wheel routes run by FBs are never a primary target on a given play.  For example, if a linebacker chooses to blitz upon reading a certain protection, that might give the FB a chance to run the route uncovered.  Certain zone coverage shells will also have soft spots for a receiver running a wheel route.  

 

If DiMarco was doubled covered and Allen threw the ball to him, that's not DiMarco's fault or Daboll's fault (at least I assume Daboll wouldn't have a FB as his primary read).  That has nothing to do with whether or not DiMarco should have been on the field and everything to do with Allen making a poor decision.  

no, you need to go back and look at the play. It was fugly

[Logic]

12 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

no, you need to go back and look at the play. It was fugly

I believe YOU need to go back and look at the play.

Two men covered DiMarco. That means a WR (John Brown, as Gunner pointed out) was single covered. The play worked as designed.

The problem was Josh THROWING to the double covered fullback deep downfield, not the fact there WAS a double covered fullback deep downfield. 

What made the play fugly was the o-line breakdown and Josh's poor decision.

[Mr. WEO]

2 hours ago, Logic said:

Like I said: rarely do offenses who typically roster fullbacks suddenly stop doing so.

Are you advocating that they don't roster a fullback AT ALL? Because I don't think that's going to happen. Their addition of a UDFA at the position backs up this point. They added competition at the position. Not exactly an indication that they want to phase it out altogether.

Are you advocating that DiMarco, specifically, be replaced? If so, who do you suggest?

 

Not replaced.  Cut and no FB.  Adds nothing, as I showed.  He's not even a good FB.

[Matt_In_NH]

He is spread out wide in 4 WR sets a LOT

[Punching Bag]

4 hours ago, Brennan Huff said:

All I know is there should never be a play call for 4th and long in the 4th quarter of a playoff game where Allen is chucking the ball up for Dimarco in double coverage. I’m sure that not how the play was drawn up but he shouldn’t have even been on the field..

 

Such insight!  You ought to be applying for a front office job especially one of the AFC East rivals!

[Brennan Huff]

1 minute ago, Limeaid said:

 

Such insight!  You ought to be applying for a front office job especially one of the AFC East rivals!

Wow what an equally impressive response! I’ll bet you win most sarcastic member of the household every year! What a joy you are!

[Logic]

8 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Not replaced.  Cut and no FB.  Adds nothing, as I showed.  He's not even a good FB.

Understood.

I do not believe the Bills will be granting your wish so long as Daboll is employed.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

5 minutes ago, mattynh said:

He is spread out wide in 4 WR sets a LOT

 

Yep - basically if they don't throw a guy over there you just throw it right off the snap and you can get like 6-10 yards.  NE does this with Develin sometimes.  You split him there so they have to adjust the coverage to edelman.  

Just now, Logic said:

Understood.

I do not believe the Bills will be granting your wish so long as Daboll is employed.

 

I'd be willing to give the rookie a long hard look though.  Depends on his hands, blocking, special teams ability etc.  He did block a few kicks in college though - he's also most likely bigger, stronger, and faster than Dimarco.  Also a high character fella.  We'll see i guess. 

[LABILLBACKER]

4 hours ago, Gugny said:

 

Actually, it was the perfect play call with the perfect personnel on the field.  It was simply poorly executed.

A perfect play?.....you're saying that tongue in cheek right?....I've never found DiMarco to be a productive member of this team. I also consider him a huge waste of a roster spot based on his time on the field and impact. I liken him to Lee Smith. 

[Rubes]

What I want to know is, when did "roster" become a verb?

 

[Gugny]

12 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

A perfect play?.....you're saying that tongue in cheek right?....I've never found DiMarco to be a productive member of this team. I also consider him a huge waste of a roster spot based on his time on the field and impact. I liken him to Lee Smith. 

 

It's all about execution, man.  I learnt that right here.

[GunnerBill]

18 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

A perfect play?.....you're saying that tongue in cheek right?....I've never found DiMarco to be a productive member of this team. I also consider him a huge waste of a roster spot based on his time on the field and impact. I liken him to Lee Smith. 

 

Di Marco's job on the play was to attract double coverage, which he did. 

[Mr. WEO]

53 minutes ago, Logic said:

Understood.

I do not believe the Bills will be granting your wish so long as Daboll is employed.

 

Daboll hardly gives the guy anything to do?  What's the logic behind keeping him?

 

Anyway...this is absolutely a make or break year for Daboll.

[Billl]

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

We got you there in the end  

 

Gug agrees with you. He is being sarcastic. 

 

I think you are both wrong. We ended up with Houston doubling Di Marco and Smith. From that point on the numbers on the rest of the field are firmly in the Bills favour. To lose the down from that point is pretty inept football. 

It’s surely not by design that it worked out that way, but you aren’t wrong.  If you can get two defenders to cover DiMarco 40 yards down the field, that’s a win.  The problem is Josh actually decided to throw it to DiMarco.

 

This is a pretty good breakdown of the good, bad, and ugly of that game.

 

https://www.theringer.com/2020/1/5/21050032/josh-allen-buffalo-bills-houston-texans-wild-card-round-lateral-catch

Edited May 1, 2020 by Billl

[Punching Bag]

6 hours ago, dbfla10 said:

Does anyone know or where to get information on how often Dimarco is on the field. I wonder if the Bills running game is that much better with him out there. I wonder cause he takes a roster spot. Teams are starting to use ST LBs, and TEs as a FB to save a spot. May be worth a look. 

 

Do you mean this?

 

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/snap-counts?year=2019&team=BUF&week=ALL&position=FB&op=Submit&form_build_id=form-hBtjs56vczc8CXKQRHZGdpWGNirygt_M8UuHjOZ1a2o&form_id=fo_stats_snap_counts_form

Player	Team	Position	Total Snaps	Off Snaps	Off Snap Pct	Def Snaps	Def Snap Pct	ST Snaps	ST Snap Pct
42-P.DiMarco	BUF	FB	329	174	15.9%	0	0.0%	155	37.1%

[LABILLBACKER]

1 hour ago, Gugny said:

 

It's all about execution, man.  I learnt that right here.

 

52 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Di Marco's job on the play was to attract double coverage, which he did. 

I think the double coverage was purely by luck.  Patrick DiMarco's 6 catches per year hardly strikes fear into DC's purposely double teaming him. If you want to run an occasional wheel route for him....fine. But under no circumstances should he ever running go routes. And whether you believe he should be on this team (which I don't) it's very likely you'll never see him run a deep route again. Especially with our new wrs.

Edited May 1, 2020 by LABILLBACKER

[GunnerBill]

1 minute ago, LABILLBACKER said:

 

I think the double coverage was purely by luck.  Patrick DiMarco's 6 catches per year hardly strikes fear into DC's purposely double teaming him. If you want to run an occasional wheel route for him....fine. But under no circumstances should he ever running go routes. And whether you believe he should be on this team (which I don't) it's very likely you'll never see him run a deep route again. Especially with our new wrs.

 

We ran that exact play early in the season. Think it was v one of the New York teams.