Who is to blame for our lack of Lombardis?

[Royale with Cheese]

4 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Why not? Image if a program existed that could tell you opponents tendencies percentages under certain formations historically and in game techniques based on player attributes? Directly relay it to Josh so he could direct accordingly. It would be a huge benefit. You could run plays were formations have statistical probabilities to succeed in best spots around the field. 

First, this is why they watch film.  Several hours of film.  

 

Secondly, this isn’t Tecmo Bowl where the defense lines up and stays still.  They constantly move, shift and disguise before pre-snap…not to mention they don’t run the same game plan each week and it changes mid game too.  You don’t have a solid platform to use.
 

You are talking about taking all human instincts out of the game which is ludicrous.

 

No need to study film, you will just have a live software spitting out percentages telling Josh what to do.  I’m sure he’s going to love his ear piece while the playclock is running down.

 

”Josh there in base, 78% chance a run play to the left will work.  No wait, scratch that, the DL shifted now run play right…that works 91% of the time.  Uh oh, the Mike shifted right…I don’t like that percentage.  Lets go slants left.  *****!  The Mike moved back…that’s only 48% successful.  Back to run right!”

 

 

[MJS]

2 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Not necessarily. Sometimes superior talent makes mistakes against a nearly equal talent. But then again, that should be factored into overall talent. Because how can you be superior if you can’t win more consistently if you are truly “more talented” . If you have 2 players that can each run 4.45s , you want the player who can run 4.45s the most consistently and that’s a skill. Same with QBs or any position. 

The playoffs are a one-and-done scenario. You can be the more talented, better coached team and still get upset in one game. That's what makes the NFL exciting. Get to the playoffs and you can win it all if you go on a nice little run. The best team in the NFL does NOT always win the Superbowl, in fact, often they don't.

 

If you think luck has nothing to do with it, you are just wrong. Sometimes you fumble and the ball bounces right back to you. Sometimes a ball is tipped and bounces to the ground instead of into the hands of a defender. Sometimes injuries occur to key players. Sometimes inferior players can step it up to perform at a high level for a big game or for a big play, then disappear again. Sometimes the best players in the league have an off day.

 

There are an infinite amount of variables, some of them you can control and some you can't.

 

It it were like other sports and you play 7 games to determine a winner, we would see a vastly different outcome in championship wins. The better teams rise to the top with a larger sample size. But that's part of what I like about the NFL. Any team can put together one game to beat a superior opponent.

[ddaryl]

I blame the fans on message boards who are always picking at the scabs.. Stop picking them and they will heal

[Milanos Milano]

7 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

First, this is why they watch film.  Several hours of film.  

 

Secondly, this isn’t Tecmo Bowl where the defense lines up and stays still.  They constantly move, shift and disguise before pre-snap…not to mention they don’t run the same game plan each week and it changes mid game too.  You don’t have a solid platform to use.
 

You are talking about taking all human instincts out of the game which is ludicrous.

 

No need to study film, you will just have a live software spitting out percentages telling Josh what to do.  I’m sure he’s going to love his ear piece while the playclock is running down.

 

”Josh there in base, 78% chance a run play to the left will work.  No wait, scratch that, the DL shifted now run play right…that works 91% of the time.  Uh oh, the Mike shifted right…I don’t like that percentage.  Lets go slants left.  *****!  The Mike moved back…that’s only 48% successful.  Back to run right!”

 

 

Of course they shift. That’s why you have real time percentages. AI programs are much much faster processing information of the best optimal play than humans are. Lol your last paragraph is something I would nearly expect. That’s much better than some coordinators just winging it. 

Edited March 12, 2022 by IronMaidenBills

[Mike in Horseheads]

3 hours ago, Gugny said:

Are you talking about the Bills organization in its history (zero Lombardis), or are you talking about the Bills under the Pegulas, or are you talking about the Beane/McDermott regime?

He's talking about the Sabres

[ALLEN1QB]

2 kickers. 1 that missed a chip shot & 1 that didn't squib it.

[Royale with Cheese]

13 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

There is a thing called objective statistical analysis. 

No there isn’t.

 

Dude, you are confusing the hell out of this.

 

Stats give you information.  

 

What an objective stat is “which coach has the most wins?”  That can’t be debated.

 

What would make it subjective is “which coach is the greatest of all time?”  stats can support but doesn’t tell you who is the greatest.  Do you see now?

 

So this whole thread of who is to blame isn’t objective no matter how many terrible takes you reply with.

[Milanos Milano]

Just now, Royale with Cheese said:

No there isn’t.

 

Dude, you are confusing the hell out of this.

 

Stats give you information.  

 

What an objective stat is “which coach has the most wins?”  That can’t be debated.

 

What would make it subjective is “which coach is the greatest of all time?”  stats can support but doesn’t tell you who is the greatest.  Do you see now?

 

So this whole thread of who is to blame isn’t objective no matter how many terrible takes you reply with.

Stats can be objective. A punter averaging 46 yards isn’t subjective. They are real measured results. Josh Allen throwing 3 interceptions isn’t subjective. He threw 3 interceptions. Data can be collected under scientific criteria. We can gather probabilities based on player attributes given their top speeds and abilities. We can gauge average processing times. How long it takes for defenders to break on a play, or distance covered during plays. Angles taken on average. All of this is objective analysis that can spit out best probability outcomes. 

If you know statistically if defenders have calculated weaknesses, you can attack them better based on probabilities. That isn’t subjective, you are making moves based on objective analysis. 

[Ralonzo]

1 hour ago, coloradobillsfan said:

thank you, the truth is out there

 

 

[Royale with Cheese]

6 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Stats can be objective. A punter averaging 46 yards isn’t subjective. They are real measured results. Josh Allen throwing 3 interceptions isn’t subjective. He threw 3 interceptions. Data can be collected under scientific criteria. We can gather probabilities based on player attributes given their top speeds and abilities. We can gauge average processing times. How long it takes for defenders to break on a play, or distance covered during plays. Angles taken on average. All of this is objective analysis that can spit out best probability outcomes. 

If you know statistically if defenders have calculated weaknesses, you can attack them better based on probabilities. That isn’t subjective, you are making moves based on objective analysis. 

How are you not keeping up with this conversation?

[Milanos Milano]

Imagine knowing which players weaknesses were based on play fakes and stiff arms. If you knew player X had more miss tackles if a stiff arm was involved, you would be more inclined to play with a stiff arm against that player on particular plays. Or if a corner struggled most on double moves, you would know to incorporate more of those moves, etc. 

[Nextmanup]

3 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Bills under Pegula’s. Sorry, should have been more clear. I want to try and make this as less subjective as possible. Where would you rank our overall talent acquisition across the league? 6th, 3rd, 1st? And what gauge should we use? Statistical quartiles analysis weighted based on positional importance? 
 

Where do we rank McDermott in coaching performance league wide? 10th, 7th, 3rd, etc? What statistical performance gauge are we using to judge coaches? I seriously want to know where we should be placing blame mathematically. 

As an aside, and to make the conversation more interesting, you can argue that the range of talent across the league represents a TINY slice of bandwidth.

 

I.E., as you look at NFL football players across the league, they are pretty much all cut from the same cloth in terms of size, strength, speed, and athleticism.  They have all been athletic freaks/stars through their entire lives, particularly at lower levels.

 

You can also look at what BB has done in New England with Brady and a giant revolving door of players on offense and defense over many years and he found a way to make what he had work.

 

In this sense, maybe winning in the NFL is HUGELY about coaching/scheming/preparation/execution, all of which fall under the umbrella of "coaching" and definitely not "talent acquisition."

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

 

[Milanos Milano]

3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

How are you not keeping up with this conversation?

So objective statistics outside of win/loss don’t exist for coaches? Not knowing which plays have higher probabilities of success don’t count? So you want McDermott to go all in on pocket 5s? 

[Ya Digg?]

2 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Imagine knowing which players weaknesses were based on play fakes and stiff arms. If you knew player X had more miss tackles if a stiff arm was involved, you would be more inclined to play with a stiff arm against that player on particular plays. Or if a corner struggled most on double moves, you would know to incorporate more of those moves, etc. 

so you mean if these guys we able to study previous games their opponents have played, perhaps even watch their previous games, study their tendencies, have a breakdown of the types of plays they run, things like that???? I’m so confused as to what these teams do now to prepare for their games 

[Milanos Milano]

1 minute ago, Nextmanup said:

As an aside, and to make the conversation more interesting, you can argue that the range of talent across the league represents a TINY slice of bandwidth.

 

I.E., as you look at NFL football players across the league, they are pretty much all cut from the same cloth in terms of size, strength, speed, and athleticism.  They have all been athletic freaks/stars through their entire lives, particularly at lower levels.

 

You can also look at what BB has done in New England with Brady and a giant revolving door of players on offense and defense over many years and he found a way to make what he had work.

 

In this sense, maybe winning in the NFL is HUGELY about coaching/scheming/preparation/execution, all of which fall under the umbrella of "coaching" and definitely not "talent acquisition."

 

Thoughts anyone?

 

 

This is true to some extent, but I think there are deeper attributes affecting talent than just raw speed or height/weight. Mental processing is huge. Rarely do you ever hear stats about Edmunds closing speed, total reaction times vs ground covered, angle of pursuit, etc. Instincts are a very hard but important scientific measurement in NFL players. But usually tackles for loss or lowest yards allowed per tackle is a good starting point in determining how instinctive a player is. 

[Malazan]

Why are these bait threads allowed? Why are posters like this not banned?

[Royale with Cheese]

1 minute ago, IronMaidenBills said:

So objective statistics outside of win/loss don’t exist for coaches? Not knowing which plays have higher probabilities of success don’t count? So you want McDermott to go all in on pocket 5s? 

First of all, I specifically gave you an example of an objective stat.  Somehow you missed it.

 

Second of all, this debate is stemming from your reply in which you specifically say “we haven’t determined yet what is the best way to determine roster success.”

 

But you want to know objectively who is to blame for no Super Bowls.

There is nothing objectively that gives that answer.  It can be debated but measured stat that gives you once answer to this.  On a team of 53 players, dozens of coaches and FO personnel….there isn’t one objective answer.

[Milanos Milano]

9 minutes ago, Ya Digg? said:

so you mean if these guys we able to study previous games their opponents have played, perhaps even watch their previous games, study their tendencies, have a breakdown of the types of plays they run, things like that???? I’m so confused as to what these teams do now to prepare for their games 

It takes an immense amount of time to break down every single minute detail that is ultimately important for even the smallest of changes. NFL teams don’t do enough statistical breakdown via machine learning. 
How often do we ever hear about average reaction times from Edmunds or average play in his space. Certainly there must be some metric that tracks individual players zone of expected coverage. 

Edited March 12, 2022 by IronMaidenBills

[Solomon Grundy]

Personally, I think it’s a trio thing. Ownership, GM and HC needs to be rowing in synchronization. Is it strictly about winning the chip or being relevant for a period of time? 

[Milanos Milano]

1 minute ago, Royale with Cheese said:

First of all, I specifically gave you an example of an objective stat.  Somehow you missed it.

 

Second of all, this debate is stemming from your reply in which you specifically say “we haven’t determined yet what is the best way to determine roster success.”

 

But you want to know objectively who is to blame for no Super Bowls.

There is nothing objectively that gives that answer.  It can be debated but measured stat that gives you once answer to this.  On a team of 53 players, dozens of coaches and FO personnel….there isn’t one objective answer.

So should we or shouldn’t we attempt to try and find an objective answer? Don’t tell me it’s impossible. We just don’t have the proper data to make such a distinct determination yet. Doesn’t mean we can’t talk about methods in making it possible. 

[billsfan1959]

8 minutes ago, Nextmanup said:

You can also look at what BB has done in New England with Brady and a giant revolving door of players on offense and defense over many years and he found a way to make what he had work.

 

In this sense, maybe winning in the NFL is HUGELY about coaching/scheming/preparation/execution, all of which fall under the umbrella of "coaching" and definitely not "talent acquisition."

 

When your example of talent acquisition not being as important as coaching involves the talent acquisition of Tom Brady, it is not a very good example.

[Royale with Cheese]

8 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

So should we or shouldn’t we attempt to try and find an objective answer? Don’t tell me it’s impossible. We just don’t have the proper data to make such a distinct determination yet. Doesn’t mean we can’t talk about methods in making it possible. 

Yes it’s impossible.

 

And don’t listen to Joan Baez because there isn’t an answer to how many miles either.

[Milanos Milano]

2 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

When your example of talent acquisition not being as important as coaching involves the talent acquisition of Tom Brady, it is not a very good example.

I’m still not sold on Brady. He played with one of the best coaches ever (took a QB who threw a handful of times against us to the playoffs) , and Brady playing with one of the best supporting cast teams in years. While Brady is a great player, I’m not convinced he has more talent than Allen. Allen with Belichick likely wins the Super Bowls last year. 

[Milanos Milano]

3 hours ago, Royale with Cheese said:

Jesus dude.  Allen has been a top 3 QB for two years….

Then he either needs better surrounding talent or our coaching is the issue we aren’t winning Super Bowls. 

[stosh64]

4 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Who is to blame for our lack of Lombardis?  

You!  I blame you!  Your as much to blame as anyone else mentioned in this thread you entitled douche.

smfh 

[Fleezoid]

As was eluded to previously ...

 

It's God. God hates us. 

 

You were right, Stevie!

[bigduke6]

we arent winning SBs right now cuz of the Chiefs,  and the fact that the AFC is loaded with good young QBs.   if we were in the NFC right now i believe we'd be in the SB every year.    we need homefield throughout the playoffs,  mbe a tad bit more impact on the defensive line.  beyond that there really isnt much to do.    nobody can really stop the Chefs when they dont let them.     terrible thing is,  its only gonna get worse as the arms race heats up in the AFC,  already seeing it with early FA moves.      there is no room for error next season,  every winnable game has to be won.     we cant have an Indy or Jags loss type game next season.

 

as much as people want to load up the D,  i dont think yer gonna stop the Chefs,  best u can do is hope to outscore them offensively imo.

[Beerball]

3 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Are we certain this is the absolute case though? We haven’t even decided what is the best ways to gauge player talent and overall roster grades. We have a punter that was ranked last, a QB ranked in the top 3 in most metrics (despite poor linemen talent), and other players I’m not sure were they finished in statistical quartiles compared to other league players. We need to find a way to weight all of that when determining how good our talent is before we can start placing blame on coaching. 

Have at it then. I believe my eyes.

[billsfan1959]

43 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

I’m still not sold on Brady. He played with one of the best coaches ever (took a QB who threw a handful of times against us to the playoffs) , and Brady playing with one of the best supporting cast teams in years. While Brady is a great player, I’m not convinced he has more talent than Allen. Allen with Belichick likely wins the Super Bowls last year. 

 

My response was to the use of NE (and Belichick) as an example of coaching being more important than talent acquisition.

 

Bill Belichick over 9 seasons as a head coach (Cle and NE) without Tom Brady as his starting QB:

 

Career:

68-76 overall regular season record

1-2 playoff record

 

Cleveland (5 seasons):

36-44 regular season record (Cle)

1-1 playoff record

 

NE (4 seasons):

33-32 regular season 

0-1 playoff record and the worse loss of his playoff career

 

Tom Brady without Belichick as his coach (2 seasons):

24-9 regular season record

5-1 playoff record, including a SB win 

 

Edited March 12, 2022 by billsfan1959

[todd]

3 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

But isn’t coaching responsible in some ways to player execution? Or is that strictly under talent performance? If a player can consistently perform, is that a coaching issue or a talent issue? 
 

True or false, can a coach win with inferior talent if they are a superior coach with better strategy? 
How much can a coach, coach up? Preparedness? Situational awareness? Statistical advantages under certain situations that are diagnosed in real time? 

you are right. McDermott got to the playoffs with Taylor. McDermott is a superior coach. Actually, one of the best in the NFL. Enjoy your obsessive, fact-free crusade.

33 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Then he either needs better surrounding talent or our coaching is the issue we aren’t winning Super Bowls. 

Nope. Wrong. 

[Ethan in Cleveland]

47 minutes ago, IronMaidenBills said:

Then he either needs better surrounding talent or our coaching is the issue we aren’t winning Super Bowls. 

Did you not watch the playoff game? Its the coaching. McDermott cost us a SB. 

Beane needs to add a few more pieces but in the end the only player that matters is Allen.

[SoCal Deek]

It’s definitely not my fault. That I know for sure! 

[GoBills808]

4 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

I refuse to believe this. Mistakes are preventable with either better coaching or better talent acquisition. Fumbling isn’t luck. Interceptions isn’t luck. Ball security is a skill, making good throws consistently is a skill. Optimizing football strategy is a skill. In game adaptation is a skill. Clock management is a skill. 

You must be very confused when you watch the games if this is really what you believe.

[SoCal Deek]

Or….we could’ve just held the Chiefs receivers at the line of scrimmage. 

[JimBob2232]

Talent acquisition.  Coaches are hired too.

[MRW]

4 hours ago, IronMaidenBills said:

False. Because they have failed to WIN Super Bowls. That’s why we play the game. Whether we are the Jets or super bowl losers is the same. Both pack up and go home. While it’s a great moral victory, it still isn’t enough and for that we need to figure out why? Why wasn’t it enough. Not good enough coaching or not good enough talent. 

 

This is complete BS. Of course everyone wants to see the Bills win a Super Bowl, but I'm not going to let that be a barrier keeping me from enjoying the ride.

[PromoTheRobot]

We're not leaving until someone's head is on a pike.

[billybob71]

Its clearly Bills Mafia's fault, we are a bunch of negative nancy's who don't create enough crowd noise at games, whine because we don't have a dome, do stupid things like jump thru tables, and sit around getting fat eatin chicken wings, beef on weck and friday night fish frys, cmon people lets get our s*** together and maybe one day we can be as great as Chiefs fans😁

Edited March 12, 2022 by billybob71

[Chicken Boo]

The only gripe anyone should have is with this past season.  Even then, the Bills join a long list of good teams that coulda/woulda/shoulda made the Super Bowl.  

 

Pressure is on going forward.

[billybob71]

Oh and not to mention our stupid nickname