Bills switch to man coverage vs Steelers

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 hours ago, CSBill said:

Not sure anyone was saying that Hap. I think we all understand the total points is what really counts 🙂 - I think? The point of this discussion was the points the Defense gave up, which, if my math is correct, was 16. That is a pretty good day.

 

Fair.  What I'm seeing/reacting to is basically:

-The defense only gave up 16 points, that's low enough we should expect to win

My response is for win expectation (which comes back to statistics), you look at TOTAL POINTS.  Hypothetically, if the defense has a splendid day and gives up 0 points but ST gives up 23 points on blocked punts and KO/punt returns - you don't expect to win.

 

Then this:

4 hours ago, CSBill said:

Having said that, while not perfect, they still played well. The Defense did their part. It was the Offense and ST that contributed the most to this loss.

 

I would agree that the offense and ST contributed that most to the loss.  That said, no, the defense did not do "their part".  They played very very well in the first half.  In the second half, as you allude to with your comments on lack of adjustments, they didn't force a single punt.  The Steelers scored on every single drive.

 

That's not good enough second half defense.  Especially after the Bills scored a field goal, "their part" was to get a stop so the Steelers had to give us the ball back.

A defense that can't do that is not doing their part.

 

And that was the story of our early-season and at times rest of season D last year.  Superior bordering on elite in the first half, unable to get stops in the 2nd half.

 

Flip it around - if the offense fails to score on every single drive in one half of football, but then scores 23 points in the second half and we lose 30-23 do think people would be saying "the Offense did their part, they played well enough, when we score 23 points we should expect to win?

 

I Think Not.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

3 hours ago, 2020 Our Year For Sure said:

Even McDermott at his postgame press conference, when asked about the defense, was all "when you take away the blocked punt they only gave up 16 points." And as you know he's not a guy into excuse-making or fudging numbers.

 

When you're discussing the DEFENSE, not the TEAM but just the defense, it's perfectly logical to filter out non-defense points allowed. It's like when you want to know how accurate a quarterback is, adjusted completion percentage that filters out drops is more accurate and useful than raw comp%.

 

I think we're taking McDermott's remarks a bit out of context.  He said "I thought the defense gave us a chance" (which is true) and "Obviously, when the QB can stand in on 3rd down and convert, it's not good enough".  Pitts converted on 4 of 12 3rd downs - they were all in the 2nd half.

 

I'm gonna duck out after this because why beat the hoss, but the original post I was responding to that started all this said:

13 hours ago, Stank_Nasty said:

And I say as a general Rule it was a good move. Defense showed did plenty to win this game. 
Anytime, in today’s NFL, you hold an opponent to 250 total Yds and 16 pts you should expect to win that game. 

 

My points are

1) if you're talking statistical expectation to win, it rolls on total points.  Any time you hold the other team to, I think it's less than 20 points, the statistical expectation is in your favor, but that's total points, not "points given up by defense"

2) I'm sorry, but in terms of total performance, not forcing a single COP without a score in the second half is not "plenty to win this game".  Football is 60 minutes, and a shutout for the first half of the game then giving up a score on every possession in the second half is not "plenty to win"

 

11 hours ago, MPT said:

That is how football works though. This isn't basketball or hockey where everyone plays offense and defense. They are completely separate entities. If the defense only gives up 16 points, they did their job well. Obviously it's still a team loss, but you can't say the defense played poorly when they only gave up one touchdown. 

 

I can say the defense didn't play well enough in the second half when the opponent scored on every single possession.   I woudn't say they played poorly, but I will say they didn't do "plenty to win".  I mean, c'mon guys - if the offense failed to score on every single drive of the second half of football while meanwhile the opponent nibbled down the lead and scored on a ST play, would you be saying they did "plenty to win" because they built up a lead in the first half?

 

Really?

 

11 hours ago, MPT said:

Just curious, would you still blame the defense if we lost 6-3? 10-6? Where's the cutoff?

 

As far as numbers, see above.

 

As far as blaming the defense, I probably need to reiterate - Clearly the ST and offense have the larger portion of blame for the loss.  But neither am I saying the defense did enough that we should "expect to win" or that the defense did "plenty to win this game".   To me, you can't purely look at points given up.   You have to look at the drives, as well.

 

if the defense had held on 2 drives in the 2nd half, that would be "the defense did plenty to win this game" in my book (NFL average is ~ 2 punts per half).  If they had held on one drive, the Pitts drive after the blocked punt and our field goal, I would also say they did their part.

[CSBill]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Fair.  What I'm seeing/reacting to is basically:

-The defense only gave up 16 points, that's low enough we should expect to win

My response is for win expectation (which comes back to statistics), you look at TOTAL POINTS.  Hypothetically, if the defense has a splendid day and gives up 0 points but ST gives up 23 points on blocked punts and KO/punt returns - you don't expect to win.

 

Then this:

 

I would agree that the offense and ST contributed that most to the loss.  That said, no, the defense did not do "their part".  They played very very well in the first half.  In the second half, as you allude to with your comments on lack of adjustments, they didn't force a single punt.  The Steelers scored on every single drive.

 

That's not good enough second half defense.  Especially after the Bills scored a field goal, "their part" was to get a stop so the Steelers had to give us the ball back.

A defense that can't do that is not doing their part.

 

And that was the story of our early-season and at times rest of season D last year.  Superior bordering on elite in the first half, unable to get stops in the 2nd half.

 

Flip it around - if the offense fails to score on every single drive in one half of football, but then scores 23 points in the second half and we lose 30-23 do think people would be saying "the Offense did their part, they played well enough, when we score 23 points we should expect to win?

 

I Think Not.

Okay, I see your point. Good discussion. Hopefully all three phases get better soon. 

[Coach Tuesday]

The Steelers saw what was happening and trusted their young receivers to make contested catches which they did (unlike the Bills’ well-paid veteran receivers).  They also likely knew that the Bills’ corners are lax in their trailing technique and don’t get their heads around, leading to DPI calls.  It worked.  Not saying zone would’ve done better but the Bills just got outplayed and out-coached.

[GoBills808]

Wallace and White can both play man if the situation presents itself, White more competently obviously. The only guy who really struggles in man coverage is Taron Johnson. He doesn’t have the technique to play man, needs zone to keep everything in front of him so he can react, which he does very well.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

4 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Wallace and White can both play man if the situation presents itself, White more competently obviously. The only guy who really struggles in man coverage is Taron Johnson. He doesn’t have the technique to play man, needs zone to keep everything in front of him so he can react, which he does very well.

 

The caveat I'll make here is that Wallace doesn't have the speed to play man against a top WR.  He has the mental aspect but he lacks the elite speed and shiftiness.

[dave mcbride]

3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Fair.  What I'm seeing/reacting to is basically:

-The defense only gave up 16 points, that's low enough we should expect to win

My response is for win expectation (which comes back to statistics), you look at TOTAL POINTS.  Hypothetically, if the defense has a splendid day and gives up 0 points but ST gives up 23 points on blocked punts and KO/punt returns - you don't expect to win.

 

Then this:

 

I would agree that the offense and ST contributed that most to the loss.  That said, no, the defense did not do "their part".  They played very very well in the first half.  In the second half, as you allude to with your comments on lack of adjustments, they didn't force a single punt.  The Steelers scored on every single drive.

 

That's not good enough second half defense.  Especially after the Bills scored a field goal, "their part" was to get a stop so the Steelers had to give us the ball back.

A defense that can't do that is not doing their part.

 

And that was the story of our early-season and at times rest of season D last year.  Superior bordering on elite in the first half, unable to get stops in the 2nd half.

 

Flip it around - if the offense fails to score on every single drive in one half of football, but then scores 23 points in the second half and we lose 30-23 do think people would be saying "the Offense did their part, they played well enough, when we score 23 points we should expect to win?

 

I Think Not.

The way I look at it, the Bills lost the ST battle 7-3. Their first 3 points were ONLY because of ST play. In the non-ST portion of the game, they lost 16-13.  13 points at home for the #2 offense of 2020 speaks very poorly of the offense, but maybe it's just the opponent. They clearly struggle against Pitt, putting up only 19 vs. the Steelers last year (factoring in the pick 6 by Taron Johnson) and 14 the year before (In 2019, they had a pick returned to the 18 and had to settle for three after making no progress; they also started their first TD drive at the Pitt 40 yard line after a shanked punt.) So basically, in their last three games vs. the Steelers, they've averaged 15.3 offensive points per game. Maybe their scheme is just a bad matchup for Pitt??? Maybe Pitt's D is far better than average?

Edited September 14, 2021 by dave mcbride

[Coach Tuesday]

I will add (and haven't seen it mentioned) that White's technique on the Claypool sideline catch was basically perfect, especially against a bigger WR.  He stayed at Claypool's hip and timed his jump right, and tried to swim his arm through to punch the ball out - Claypool is just stronger.  The only knock on the play was that Tre maybe should've tried to steer him wider off the release - there was too much space between the receiver and the sideline.  But you can't blame Tre for that play it was just incredible.

[RyanC883]

On 9/13/2021 at 9:46 PM, NewEra said:

The game stats are one thing.  We held them to 0 points at the half.  Not sure how many yards we gave up in the 1st half, but it was low.  Our D player lights out in the 1st half. 
 

then the 2nd half happened.  We didn’t force them to punt once in the 2nd half.  They scored on EVERY possession.  That’s not good defense in the 2nd half.  
 

our Defense wasn’t the reason we lost, but if they played better in the 2nd half, we might’ve won in spite of our OL, play calling  and mediocre QB play.  

 

 bingo.  The D was a tale of two halves.  

[Richard Noggin]

On 9/14/2021 at 6:54 AM, vincec said:

If they spend a high pick on a corner and he works out, then he is almost certainly going to walk when his rookie contract is up because they couldn’t afford to keep him. So it would be a rental. I don’t think they see using their high picks in that way.

But by then one or both of the starting safeties are long gone, and therefore likely cheaper; this could in turn reallocate/redistribute cap space in myriad ways, including re-signing a 3rd or 4th-year drafted CB2 to a big deal. The complication is that CB1 White's deal runs through the 2025 season, which would be a 2022 draftee's 4th season...wherein we face a confluence. Good problem to have.

[DrPJax]

On 9/13/2021 at 9:08 PM, NewEra said:

Specifically, not committing 26 yard PI’s on what was basically a Hail Mary on 3rd down.  

I rarely complain about calls as they tend to even out.  But I rewatched the game and focused on two pass plays. The one where trey was defending and the guy still caught the ball along the right sideline ( clay pool) .  White did not turn his head around ever, Charles Davis mentioned it, but trey had his hand in between claypools trying to pry the ball free yet the guy still made the catch as the ball was not under thrown. No flags !   Then watch Levi on that play where he draws a flag.  Great coverage , ball was slightly under thrown but not like 3-5 yards as the receiver still had a chance to catch or make contact with the ball. In slow mo you actually see Levi look straight up and over his right shoulder as that  arc of the ball coming in and he put his hands up just as the receiver reached up. Levi did not create the contact , and it was slight contact to say the least.  Levi had his hands up and did make contact with the ball. The ref who had the worst view threw the flag.     But looking at the two plays side by side , there was no difference in technique.  Trey did not look back or Locate the ball any more than Levi did.  Claypool just mad an amazing catch.   My point is that Levi actually had great coverage , but got hit with a terrible call imo and was penalized because the throw was poor but actually the receiver had the same chance to catch the ball as claypool did.  That call sealed the game as Pitt got a fg and lead was back to 10.  It’s inconsistent calls like that which influence the outcome of a game that are infuriating.    Watch those two plays together and see what you think.  Could Mcd have challenged that call , I don’t remember the time, but it was a possession changing call really?!  We really never seemed to have many calls go our way that game. Hard to feel like Pitt deserved that win outside of the blocked punt.  

[MJS]

The defense was pretty good. Can't fault them for the loss. A couple calls were BS as well, like the pass interference call that reversed White's INT.

[John from Riverside]

I think the problem with this is that Wallace is not a good man to man defender zone was supposed to be his thing

[BigAl2526]

Tagovailoa is a rhythm passer who tends to throw more short stuff.  I think man coverage is generally going to be more effective versus that kind of QB.  Whether or not Wallace can be effective depends on the receiver.  He's slow, and not particularly strong, so he'll be vulnerable to burners, and also big, physical receivers.  Unfortunately, Miami has both size and speed.  Parker is big, and pretty fast to boot.  Fuller and Waddle are both burners.  Whatever Buffalo does, Wallace is going to need help.