The weakness of Coach McD

[Happy]

13 minutes ago, MJS said:

I think the offensive approach has been due to having an inexperienced QB and has been mainly up to Daboll.

 

But McDermott is the head coach. He has to take responsibility for both sides of the ball. If Daboll is being too conservative it's his job to instruct him to play it differently or to find a new OC that does it right.

 

I kind of doubt that McDermott dictates the offensive approach. Maybe he does, but I believe he leaves it up to the offensive coaches. But still, he needs to have the right coaches and give the right direction.

 

As far as game management like challenges and managing the clock, I think that's overrated. I think most coaches make periodic mistakes in that regard, even the best ones, and most do a fine job. It's one of those things that make you a genius if it works or an idiot if it fails. I don't think McDermott does a worse job at that than other coaches. In fact, I like his approach to using time outs in key situations to get a read on what the offense or defense is doing o the particular play after they line up and then countering it.

 

I also doubt McDermott dictates the offensive approach.  He gave Dennison enough rope to hang himself.  Another poster commented that even if McDermott is not exactly enamored with Daboll, he didn't want Josh to have to learn a new offense.  There could be something to that.  I also think at this point in his career, McDermott doesn't know enough about offense (or SpT) to get heavily involved with them; he's not a Harbaugh, Belichick, or Payton.

 

Disagree with your game management stance, I don't think they are overrated.  Bad challenges translate into wasted time outs, which cannot be used later in critical situations.  Poor clock management can cost points.  Mistakes will be made, but McDermott hasn't proven to be particularly skilled in game management; the Houston game is an example, especially right before half time.

 

Good point on time outs in critical situations to get a read on the opposing offense or defense formation; McDermott has done a good job regarding that.

 

 

[ColoradoBills]

Out of the last 10 Head Coaches of the Bills McDermott is by FAR the best.

Let's give this another year or two.

 

Remember the grass is always greener over the septic tank!

Edited June 23, 2020 by ColoradoBills

[MJS]

5 hours ago, Happy said:

Disagree with your game management stance, I don't think they are overrated.  Bad challenges translate into wasted time outs, which cannot be used later in critical situations.  Poor clock management can cost points.  Mistakes will be made, but McDermott hasn't proven to be particularly skilled in game management; the Houston game is an example, especially right before half time.

 

I meant overrated in the sense that there is not a large divide between coaches who do it well and those who don't. I've seen Belichick make very questionable game management decisions. All coaches do. All coaches lose out on challenges.

 

Many of these decisions might get praised if they work but condemned if they don't. I just don't think there's a coach out there who gets it all right all the time and the bearing on the game is minimal compared to other, far more important things like talent, your QB, schemes, play calling, etc. Andy Reid was blasted for years for bad game and clock management and he just won the Superbowl.

[KD in CA]

I'm so glad we've moved on from "but he gets blown out every fourth game!!"

[BobbyC81]

On 6/21/2020 at 12:35 PM, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

yeah end of half is definitely a spot he needs to be more aggressive, especially with Josh in year 3 throwing to a group like Diggs/Brown/Beasley/Knox/Moss. It's time to take off the training wheels.

 

I think Derm knows this though, I really do.

As is often said, Belechick thrives on the last 2 minutes of a half.

[JetsFan20]

The league has proven over the years (all the advanced analytics agree) that offense is more important than defense. Will McDermott build an offense capable of being a true contender?

 

 

[eball]

4 hours ago, JetsFan20 said:

The league has proven over the years (all the advanced analytics agree) that offense is more important than defense. Will McDermott build an offense capable of being a true contender?

 

 

 

Just two years ago the Pats*** beat the Rams with defense.

 

When is Gase going to be fired?

[machine gun kelly]

McD was limited by the talent he had on his team, and this year I predict he will be much more aggressive now that he has a returning O Line, Diggs and Moss added to the existing skill players and lastly, Allen going into his third year.  The defense will be at least the same to better.  My prediction is 12th in offense, 1st in rushing, 15th in passing, and a top 3 defense.  We will win a playoff game possibly two, but fall short in the championship game to either Baltimore or KC.  That will be progress.  I know we all want the SB, but not sure if we are there yet.  No one will be bringing up our drought anymore after this year as we will hit the playoffs three out of four years.

[Watkins101]

5 hours ago, machine gun kelly said:

McD was limited by the talent he had on his team, and this year I predict he will be much more aggressive now that he has a returning O Line, Diggs and Moss added to the existing skill players and lastly, Allen going into his third year.  The defense will be at least the same to better.  My prediction is 12th in offense, 1st in rushing, 15th in passing, and a top 3 defense.  We will win a playoff game possibly two, but fall short in the championship game to either Baltimore or KC.  That will be progress.  I know we all want the SB, but not sure if we are there yet.  No one will be bringing up our drought anymore after this year as we will hit the playoffs three out of four years.

I don't see us being #1 in rushing. Unless Lamar gets hurt, the Ravens look like they will run away with the rushing yards total.

[Phil The Thrill]

On 6/21/2020 at 9:59 AM, WIDE LEFT said:

I am a huge fan of Coach McD and believe Bills are lucky to have him. He does almost all the important things right. But there is one area that he needs to improve on, his biggest weakness, game management. Specifically the offensive philosophy when taking a lead in a big game. He goes hyper conservative. The playoff game v Houston for example. Bills with a 16-0 lead, produce a turnover in Houston territory. Great chance to put the game away. What is play call - three straight runs, including a run play on third & 3. Unsuccessful, forced to punt. One great indicator of a too conservative offense is when a team loses a game in which they won the turnover battle. The second New England game is another great example. Bills down early, come roaring back to take a 17-13 lead, and force a 3 & out. Bills get the ball, predictable as the sun rising in the East, run three straight times and punt. You can’t beat elite teams with that mentality. This was another game where Bills win turnover battle, but lose the game.

 

This has been a huge reason why we have been so unsuccessful v Patriots. Going back to Saint Doug, then Rex, and now McD, the same mentality has been employed. Take a lead or tie the game, and the offense goes into a shell. And Belichek knows this, when this situation arises in a game, he loads the front anticipating the run. And the Bills (unsuccessfully) run anyway, giving Brady the ball and the time to win the game. McD needs to change his mentality in order for the Bills to win playoff games. And please, don’t tell me that it’s the OC calling the plays. The head coach has a great amount of input, during the game, as to what TYPE of plays he wants called in various phases of the game. Again, big McD fan here, and he gets almost everything else right, an that’s no small feat.

There are so many factors that go into playcalling. First we don’t know whether the calls were all

Daboll or whether McDermott ordered those safe calls as you would suggest.  Also we don’t know whether Josh audibled out of the original playcall into a run.  I believe this happened their possession of the half.  The Bills ran the ball And everyone lost their mind and said that it was a bad call by Daboll.  In actuality, it was a pass play and Josh audibled into a Gore run which was stuffed.  He confirmed this after the game.

 

The 3rd factor is the OL.  They were improved but overall the unit wasn’t great at overpowering fronts when they needed to.  This has happened in short yardage or at the end of games.  The line remains intact this season but they will need to play better.  

On 6/22/2020 at 2:51 PM, Shaw66 said:

I like this. 

 

I think if the Bills struggle offensively in 2020, it will be time to begin asking some serious questions about about one or more of three people: McDermott, Daboll, Allen. We'll know which ones of the three after this season.  

I don’t disagree though, if it’s an offensive issue Daboll and/or Allen will take the heat before McDermott does

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

The most frustrating thing is the end of half kneel down or run the clock out and the people that defend it.  Why is it that football coaches get a pass for this? Can you imagine if a basketball coach was called out for repeatedly not attempting the 2 for 1 and his response was “well what if the other team stole it from us!” 
 

the more offensive possessions you have the better chance to win. It’s not up for debate. 

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

23 minutes ago, Chemical said:

The most frustrating thing is the end of half kneel down or run the clock out and the people that defend it.  Why is it that football coaches get a pass for this? Can you imagine if a basketball coach was called out for repeatedly not attempting the 2 for 1 and his response was “well what if the other team stole it from us!” 
 

the more offensive possessions you have the better chance to win. It’s not up for debate. 

 

Yeah, those two are not situations are not at all the same.  There are plenty of situations where running out the clock at the end of the half is advisable. To say it is not up for debate is just wrong. 

[Shaw66]

13 minutes ago, Chemical said:

The most frustrating thing is the end of half kneel down or run the clock out and the people that defend it.  Why is it that football coaches get a pass for this? Can you imagine if a basketball coach was called out for repeatedly not attempting the 2 for 1 and his response was “well what if the other team stole it from us!” 
 

the more offensive possessions you have the better chance to win. It’s not up for debate. 

I'm one of those people that defends it, often but not always. 

 

Without actually knowing, I am absolutely sure that McDermott has very well defined rules that he follows in making that decision.  He has, in effect, made the decision during the off-season.  His decision is based on a lot of things, including data.

 

The rules include:

 

1. Field position

2. Time remaining in the half

3. Score of the game

4. Whether he thinks big half-time adjustments are necessary

5. Historic probabilities of scoring

6. Historic probabilities of giving up a score

 

I may disagree with the decision he makes, and you may disagree with the decision, but I guarantee you that he has a more rational basis for the decision than you or I.  Guarantee it. , 

 

I believe, again without actually knowing, that unless he's way behind, his general philosophy is that there's a lot of football left to be played and 1:12 left on his own 35 is not the best opportunity he's going to get to score over the rest of the game.  Now, you can argue with that if you want, but there's a lot of logic behind that thinking.

 

Having said that, I think coaches that are aggressive at the end of the half are coaches who have good offenses.  That's true for two reasons: (1) with a good offense, the odds go up that they will make something positive happen, and (2) with a good offense, if they make a mistake and give up points at the end of the half, they are better able to overcome the problem in the second half. I think we will see McDermott's aggressiveness increase as his offense improves. 

39 minutes ago, Phil The Thrill said:

I don’t disagree though, if it’s an offensive issue Daboll and/or Allen will take the heat before McDermott does

As they should. If the offense struggles in 2020, the most likely reason is Daboll or Allen. The fact that McDermott has the wrong OC or the wrong QB is not a reason, in and of itself, to do anything about McDermott.  I mean, if Daboll isn't the guy, then McDermott has to figure that out and act on it, but if in 2020 the offense stumbles, I'm not replacing McDermott, whereas I could be replacing one of the other two. 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

9 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

Yeah, those two are not situations are not at all the same.  There are plenty of situations where running out the clock at the end of the half is advisable. To say it is not up for debate is just wrong. 

Maybe if you’re up three scores or more, but mcdermott has never been in that situation. He has done it in games the Bills are trailing and the other team is reviving the second half kickoff. 

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

9 minutes ago, Chemical said:

Maybe if you’re up three scores or more, but mcdermott has never been in that situation. He has done it in games the Bills are trailing and the other team is reviving the second half kickoff. 

 

There are situations when you should, and there are situations when you should not. It is easy to say you should always go for the points because the more possessions, the more scores.  It is also true that the more possessions, the more turnovers; or, the more possessions, the more 3 and outs.  Alot of things can happen, and its the coach's job to read the situation. That doesn't mean just the math, that means reading your team, reading your QB, reading the other team.  There are myriad factors that require consideration that cannot be captured in just applying a mathematical formula.  I guarantee McD considers all those issues.  

Edited June 23, 2020 by JoshAllenHasBigHands

[Greg S]

8 hours ago, eball said:

 

Just two years ago the Pats*** beat the Rams with defense.

 

When is Gase going to be fired?

 

Hopefully never.

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

14 minutes ago, JoshAllenHasBigHands said:

 

There are situations when you should, and there are situations when you should not. It is easy to say you should always go for the points because the more possessions, the more scores.  It is also true that the more possessions, the more turnovers; or, the more possessions, the more 3 and outs.  Alot of things can happen, and its the coach's job to read the situation. That doesn't mean just the math, that means reading your team, reading your QB, reading the other team.  There are myriad factors that require consideration that cannot be captured in just applying a mathematical formula.  I guarantee McD considers all those issues.  

Haha It’s not a “mathematical formula”, it’s pretty simple common sense. Even basketball teams with big leads will do the 2 for 1 because it’s such a fundamental part of the game. 

 

I would rather have a turnover or 3 and out than willfully give up a possession in a game before it’s over. Not only is it stupid but it’s cowardly.

I thought it was hilarious when McDermott just wanted to run the clock out at the half of a game and singletary ripped off a big gain, ruining his plans. I could envision him saying “ok guys you can try but only a field goal then let’s go inside”

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

34 minutes ago, Shaw66 said:

I'm one of those people that defends it, often but not always. 

 

Without actually knowing, I am absolutely sure that McDermott has very well defined rules that he follows in making that decision.  He has, in effect, made the decision during the off-season.  His decision is based on a lot of things, including data.

 

The rules include:

 

1. Field position

2. Time remaining in the half

3. Score of the game

4. Whether he thinks big half-time adjustments are necessary

5. Historic probabilities of scoring

6. Historic probabilities of giving up a score

 

I may disagree with the decision he makes, and you may disagree with the decision, but I guarantee you that he has a more rational basis for the decision than you or I.  Guarantee it. , 

 

I believe, again without actually knowing, that unless he's way behind, his general philosophy is that there's a lot of football left to be played and 1:12 left on his own 35 is not the best opportunity he's going to get to score over the rest of the game.  Now, you can argue with that if you want, but there's a lot of logic behind that thinking.

 

Having said that, I think coaches that are aggressive at the end of the half are coaches who have good offenses.  That's true for two reasons: (1) with a good offense, the odds go up that they will make something positive happen, and (2) with a good offense, if they make a mistake and give up points at the end of the half, they are better able to overcome the problem in the second half. I think we will see McDermott's aggressiveness increase as his offense improves. 

As they should. If the offense struggles in 2020, the most likely reason is Daboll or Allen. The fact that McDermott has the wrong OC or the wrong QB is not a reason, in and of itself, to do anything about McDermott.  I mean, if Daboll isn't the guy, then McDermott has to figure that out and act on it, but if in 2020 the offense stumbles, I'm not replacing McDermott, whereas I could be replacing one of the other two. 

I have no doubt he considers all those things. He just makes the wrong decision repeatedly. 
 

I can’t shake the comparison to basketball. Like I said before, it would be laughable if a basketball coach at any level repeatedly gave up possessions and cited any of those reasons. Not sure why football coaches get away with it. It’s probably more likely to turn the ball over in basketball. 

[eball]

1 minute ago, ScottLaw said:

And they scored 37 points in the championship game....patriots offense was potent and capable all year.... when was the last time you could say that about the Bills offense?

 

The 90s.  Not sure of your point.

[GoBills808]

4 minutes ago, Chemical said:

Haha It’s not a “mathematical formula”, it’s pretty simple common sense. Even basketball teams with big leads will do the 2 for 1 because it’s such a fundamental part of the game. 

 

I would rather have a turnover or 3 and out than willfully give up a possession in a game before it’s over. Not only is it stupid but it’s cowardly.

I thought it was hilarious when McDermott just wanted to run the clock out at the half of a game and singletary ripped off a big gain, ruining his plans. I could envision him saying “ok guys you can try but only a field goal then let’s go inside”

What game was this?

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

2 minutes ago, Chemical said:

Haha It’s not a “mathematical formula”, it’s pretty simple common sense. Even basketball teams with big leads will do the 2 for 1 because it’s such a fundamental part of the game. 

 

I would rather have a turnover or 3 and out than willfully give up a possession in a game before it’s over. Not only is it stupid but it’s cowardly.

I thought it was hilarious when McDermott just wanted to run the clock out at the half of a game and singletary ripped off a big gain, ruining his plans. I could envision him saying “ok guys you can try but only a field goal then let’s go inside”

 

The 2 for 1 is built on around the idea that, regardless of the first possession's outcome, both teams are each left with one more possession.  The success of that first possession does not impact the outcome of either teams subsequent possessions. 

 

The same is not true in football where, if you have a turnover, you create a possession for the opposing team that they would not otherwise have, thereby increasing their chance to score.  The logic of going for the score only makes sense if you are relying on the analytics, without any consideration of the context of the game. 

1 minute ago, Chemical said:

I have no doubt he considers all those things. He just makes the wrong decision repeatedly. 
 

I can’t shake the comparison to basketball. Like I said before, it would be laughable if a basketball coach at any level repeatedly gave up possessions and cited any of those reasons. Not sure why football coaches get away with it. It’s probably more likely to turn the ball over in basketball. 

 

I cannot express just how stupid this basketball comparison is. 

[Rock-A-Bye Beasley]

23 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

What game was this?

cant remember which game but I was talking about it after with my cousin then my friend also mentioned it on his podcast. 

[Shaw66]

3 hours ago, Chemical said:

I have no doubt he considers all those things. He just makes the wrong decision repeatedly. 
 

I can’t shake the comparison to basketball. Like I said before, it would be laughable if a basketball coach at any level repeatedly gave up possessions and cited any of those reasons. Not sure why football coaches get away with it. It’s probably more likely to turn the ball over in basketball. 

The fact that you cant get away from basketball means you don't really understand rational, statistical analysis.  Scores are much more important in football, and that cuts both ways. Sure you'd love to score at the end if the half, but it can be a killer if you give up a score.  

 

The risk reward is much different in hoops.  There's no risk in the two for one.  The choice is either you get one chance to score and they get one, or you get two and they get one. There's no downside to that decision.  Two is better than one. 

 

The risk of throwing the football in your end of the field with 40 seconds left is completely different. 

 

You dont seem to be able to see that. 

 

Whoops.  Just saw someone else already explained this. 

Edited June 23, 2020 by Shaw66

[JetsFan20]

14 hours ago, eball said:

 

Just two years ago the Pats*** beat the Rams with defense.

 

When is Gase going to be fired?

And how have the Bills/Jets done with consistently good defenses and bottom 5 offenses this decade? How many playoff victories between them? 
 

 

[Nextmanup]

On 6/21/2020 at 9:59 AM, WIDE LEFT said:

I am a huge fan of Coach McD and believe Bills are lucky to have him. He does almost all the important things right. But there is one area that he needs to improve on, his biggest weakness, game management. Specifically the offensive philosophy when taking a lead in a big game. He goes hyper conservative. The playoff game v Houston for example. Bills with a 16-0 lead, produce a turnover in Houston territory. Great chance to put the game away. What is play call - three straight runs, including a run play on third & 3. Unsuccessful, forced to punt. One great indicator of a too conservative offense is when a team loses a game in which they won the turnover battle. The second New England game is another great example. Bills down early, come roaring back to take a 17-13 lead, and force a 3 & out. Bills get the ball, predictable as the sun rising in the East, run three straight times and punt. You can’t beat elite teams with that mentality. This was another game where Bills win turnover battle, but lose the game.

 

This has been a huge reason why we have been so unsuccessful v Patriots. Going back to Saint Doug, then Rex, and now McD, the same mentality has been employed. Take a lead or tie the game, and the offense goes into a shell. And Belichek knows this, when this situation arises in a game, he loads the front anticipating the run. And the Bills (unsuccessfully) run anyway, giving Brady the ball and the time to win the game. McD needs to change his mentality in order for the Bills to win playoff games. And please, don’t tell me that it’s the OC calling the plays. The head coach has a great amount of input, during the game, as to what TYPE of plays he wants called in various phases of the game. Again, big McD fan here, and he gets almost everything else right, an that’s no small feat.

Does "all the important things right" except coach the team during football games.  

 

LOL.  

 

He's a .500 coach with horrible in-game management skills and a worse challenge record.  Horrific clock management.  

 

I feel he is a good motivator and keeps the team fired up through the course of the season, but is otherwise nothing special as a HC.  

 

He will have trouble once he is asked to do more than he has done, and as expectations increase.

 

 

[RyanC883]

On 6/21/2020 at 10:51 AM, Just Joshin' said:

If Atlanta was more conservative they would be NFL champs.  It is easy in retrospect to say yes/no but both approaches can work.  Even if a low probability it will sometimes hit.

 

it would be interesting to see a large sample size on the strategies to see the historical results.  The problem with football is the amount of variables.  What works against one defense may not work against another in same down/distance/field position.

 

I think the issue is that McD is always conservative.  there is no variety or toying with the other teams.   with the passing weapons we have we should pass sometimes on 3rd and less than 5.  

[eball]

22 minutes ago, RyanC883 said:

 

I think the issue is that McD is always conservative.  there is no variety or toying with the other teams.   with the passing weapons we have we should pass sometimes on 3rd and less than 5.  

What a Trumpian statement — as in, not at all true but I’ll say it with conviction because some dumbasses will believe it. 

[JoshAllenHasBigHands]

8 hours ago, Nextmanup said:

Does "all the important things right" except coach the team during football games.  

 

LOL.  

 

He's a .500 coach with horrible in-game management skills and a worse challenge record.  Horrific clock management.  

 

I feel he is a good motivator and keeps the team fired up through the course of the season, but is otherwise nothing special as a HC.  

 

He will have trouble once he is asked to do more than he has done, and as expectations increase.

 

 

Its hard to believe there are people out there that care so much about football that they take the time to post on a message board, but can simultaneously just so fundamentally have no idea what a head coach does, why McD is a very good coach, and think that getting a team with a 17 year playoff drought to the playoffs in two of his first three years is a, frankly, historic accomplishment. 

[aristocrat]

Bb in his nfl show mentioned how he uses the art of war in his coaching and finding every opponents weakness and just hammering that.  Vrabel seems to prescribe to that way of coaching.  Vrabel just running it down the pats throat all game proved that for me. Do you think Mcd would put a plan like that together?

[Bronxbomber21]

His weakness is his love for older players thats have nothing left to give on the field , but there leaders off the field 

[reddogblitz]

On 6/21/2020 at 10:51 AM, GoBills808 said:

Daboll

 

Who hired him AND brought him back for a 3rd season?  McDermott is the head coach. Buck stops with him.  He is responsible for the whole team including the offense.