It was always play action.

[Big Turk]

10 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

Quoting Rex Ruin?

 

Play action is MORE effective if a defense respects your running game and has to account for run defense. That should be a no-brainer.

 

Play action to Derrick Henry made Tannehill look like a great QB because defenses had to respect that running ability and it created a lot of space to hit his receivers.

 

Also, I think we do try some RPO plays, but those have to be strictly rule-based (QB triggers off a read) and clear on timing and execution for whether the QB hands it off or keeps it. Allen is notoriously greedy on those as I think he just feels better about the ball being in his hands to make something out of the play - the defensive reads be damned. So those exchanges result in some exaggerated and awkward handoffs that need to be cleaner.

 

 

 

It's actually mostly irrelevant.  This is people trying to make logical assumptions and then find evidence to support that instead of actually just looking at what the evidence is without a biased notion.  Similar to why saturated fats have gotten a bum rap for 60 years from the first nonsensical study that pre-determined what they wanted to show and then skewed the study to do just that. 

[Motorin']

2 hours ago, Warcodered said:

Can playaction be effective without a running game, sure, would it be more effective with a good running game, obviously.

 

But we're taking to the same people who proclaimed for three years that it was mathematically impossible for Josh Allen to be an accurate passer. 

[NewEra]

2 hours ago, boyst said:

josh also needs to be under center.

Agreed, but mix in some shotgun.  I think diversity is important. Anyone have a breakdown of shotgun to under center snaps from this game?

 

[FireChans]

29 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

Quoting Rex Ruin?

 

Play action is MORE effective if a defense respects your running game and has to account for run defense. That should be a no-brainer.

 

Play action to Derrick Henry made Tannehill look like a great QB because defenses had to respect that running ability and it created a lot of space to hit his receivers.

 

Also, I think we do try some RPO plays, but those have to be strictly rule-based (QB triggers off a read) and clear on timing and execution for whether the QB hands it off or keeps it. Allen is notoriously greedy on those as I think he just feels better about the ball being in his hands to make something out of the play - the defensive reads be damned. So those exchanges result in some exaggerated and awkward handoffs that need to be cleaner.

 

 

It’s a no brainer for someone who doesn’t understand statistics. 
 

Idk why people argue reality

[LABILLBACKER]

2 hours ago, HoofHearted said:

"the shotgun draw" 😂

....you do realize there's just as many draws behind center as in the gun. The main difference is a "delayed handoff" or draw from behind C at least allows the rb a small head start.....

[Motorin']

2 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Sorry you do not. The reality is all the analytics SHOW THAT. 

 

Why?

 

LBers play of KEYS. 

 

G-C-G Triangle (run action they play Run)

Through QB to RB

 

A RUN ACTION the LBers will play RUN.  That is the reality.

 

It's impossible for the analytics to show that teams don't have to run the ball at all for play action to work. 

 

Why? Because there's never been a season of NFL football where any team has ran the ball less than 18 times per game over the course of a season. 

 

The conditions for the claim you guys are sticking to have never existed. Teams have to prepare to defend the run because teams run the ball. And play action passing work because defenses prepare to defend the run.

 

And teams have to prepare for the run because all teams run the ball...

 

 

 

 

[HoofHearted]

17 minutes ago, LABILLBACKER said:

....you do realize there's just as many draws behind center as in the gun. The main difference is a "delayed handoff" or draw from behind C at least allows the rb a small head start.....

Sorry, it just amuses me that every run out of shotgun is a draw to most fans.

[WideNine]

7 minutes ago, Motorin' said:

 

It's impossible for the analytics to show that teams don't have to run the ball at all for play action to work. 

 

Why? Because there's never been a season of NFL football where any team has ran the ball less than 18 times per game over the course of a season. 

 

The conditions for the claim you guys are sticking to have never existed. Teams have to prepare to defend the run because teams run the ball. And play action passing work because defenses prepare to defend the run.

 

And teams have to prepare for the run because all teams run the ball...

 

 

 

 

 

I feel pretty good about what I think stats can and cannot tell me and I do place a lot of value on trending data as a tool for mapping and using probabilities.

I don't see a lot of value getting into the stat debates as I work with enough data analyst that I know they forget to look up sometimes from the numbers - it is a dead-end waste of time. For being such an infallible predictor the philosopher in me is pleased each and every time someone here or an organization like PFF who are immersed in stats come up wrong in their conclusions and predictions.

I will admit it makes me happy when they backtrack, talk about variables they did not factor in, and fail to render completely the game I love a into a joyless control chart. Perhaps they should just exchange statistics and skip the whole game playing thing
 
 

Meh - so I am old school, and I will continue to trust my eyes and how I think the Bills and their opponents perform in the context of each situation and game.

 

 

[peterpan]

4 hours ago, Big Turk said:

 

Rex Ryan said as much that whether you can run the ball or not makes no difference in terms of the success of play action because it causes a split second hesitation for the players to locate the ball and then they have to make a decision on what to do.  That hesitation is going to happen no matter what and that is enough time for the offense to create separation or give Allen a little extra time to attack deep.

I remember a game back during the Peyton manning colts era.  Maybe it was when edge James was still playing?  But the colts threw it 25 times in a row to open the game or something.  
 

Used play action out of the shotgun most snaps and it still worked.  After a while it started to work better as everyone thought they HAD to run it sometime!!!  

[Motorin']

10 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

I feel pretty good about what I think stats can and cannot tell me and I do place a lot of value on trending data as a tool for mapping and using probabilities.

I don't see a lot of value getting into the stat debates as I work with enough data analyst that I know they forget to look up sometimes from the numbers - it is a dead-end waste of time. For being such an infallible predictor the philosopher in me is pleased each and every time someone here or an organization like PFF who are immersed in stats come up wrong in their conclusions and predictions.

I will admit it makes me happy when they backtrack, talk about variables they did not factor in, and fail to render completely the game I love a into a joyless control chart. Perhaps they should just exchange statistics and skip the whole game playing thing
 
 

Meh - so I am old school, and I will continue to trust my eyes and how I think the Bills and their opponents perform in the context of each situation and game.

 

 

 

There's a problem when people confuse probability with the ability to predict the future, and modeling with reality... 

 

What's funny in the context of this debate, there's never been a game in NFL history where a team hasn't run the ball. Not once. 

 

So the idea that "you don't have to run the ball for play action to be effective" has never been tested. Not in a single game in NFL history. 

 

 

[MAJBobby]

1 hour ago, Motorin' said:

 

It's impossible for the analytics to show that teams don't have to run the ball at all for play action to work. 

 

Why? Because there's never been a season of NFL football where any team has ran the ball less than 18 times per game over the course of a season. 

 

The conditions for the claim you guys are sticking to have never existed. Teams have to prepare to defend the run because teams run the ball. And play action passing work because defenses prepare to defend the run.

 

And teams have to prepare for the run because all teams run the ball...

 

 

 

 

Except I just showed you effective running is Irrelevant to the effectiveness of PA. 
 

i am sorry you just refuse to believe facts and love those coachisms. 
 

actual FACTS staring you right in the face and refuse to accept how sad actually 

Edited October 2, 2023 by MAJBobby

[WideNine]

Just now, Motorin' said:

 

There's a problem when people confuse probability with the ability to predict the future, and modeling with reality... 

 

What's funny in the context of this debate, there's never been a game in NFL history where a team hasn't run the ball. Not once. 

 

So the idea that "you don't have to run the ball for play action to be effective" has never been tested. Not in a single game in NFL history. 

 

 

 

Yeah - I saw that.

 

We can get into some crazy debates here. I guess some folks are saying if you never manifest the threat of a run it is the same effective threat - perhaps, but I think there are degrees of threats and how much reaction they garner. Guy threatening to punch you, a guy who has punched others threatening to punch you, a guy who has already punched you threatening to do it again. Something like that  

Play action looked good yesterday with Josh executing it from under center. I thought the play action from the gun looked a bit shaky on some of the exchanges and was not sure if they were trying for some RPO??





 

[WideNine]

42 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

Except I just showed you effective running is Irrelevant to the effectiveness of PA. 
 

i am sorry you just refuse to believe facts and love those coachisms. 
 

actual FACTS staring you right in the face and refuse to accept how sad actually 

 

Some gems from that article of facts:

"The takeaway here is that once we’ve accounted for a team’s quarterback capabilities through PFF Grade (because that is always spot on), rushing rate and rushing performance relative to passing stats doesn’t tell us much about the effectiveness of their play-action usage."

I read that statement as more a lack of meaningful stats than a conclusive correlation one way or another between effectively running the ball and play action. Watering down the data creating a large sample size, individual team performance metrics (can they stop the run with their front 4 or do they have to commit more defenders...), situations like down and distance irrelevant because we all know play action on 3rd and short is just as effective as play action on 3rd and long right? 

The point here is that an NFL defender’s instincts are built on the foundation of those formative years. For that reason, NFL teams don’t need to establish the run, because the threatening nature of it has already been instilled throughout the amateur ranks.
(All facts here folks and no conjecture - who am I to argue with a guy who clearly never saw Edmunds play the run)

and lastly for the very folks that argued that you never need to run the ball at all - your article said this.
Obviously, if a team only ran play-action and never attempted to run the ball, defenses would begin to adjust. 
 

Begin to adjust 🤣

 

I am overwhelmed by the sheer factualness of this article.

 

 

 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

5 hours ago, FireChans said:

Prior to yesterday's beat down, Allen was 18 of 23 on play-action passes for 245 yards and two touchdowns.

 

Yesterday in play-action, Josh was 9/11 for 206 yards and 3 TD's. 

 

Need Dorsey to keep that going.

 

Some folks will say that the run game helps, which is understandable, but most of the data suggests that PA effectiveness is not predicated on run game success. So regardless, this is when Josh is at his most lethal.

when the front and the second level has to read pass or run vs knowing pre snap, it helps the offense 

[LyndonvilleBill]

5 hours ago, RobbRiddick said:

I get a tingly feeling when I see Josh under center. It could be sexual but I think it's that part of me that loves the old school 

Wonder if Morse says the same thing?🤣🤣🤣🤣

[MAJBobby]

25 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

Some gems from that article of facts:

"The takeaway here is that once we’ve accounted for a team’s quarterback capabilities through PFF Grade (because that is always spot on), rushing rate and rushing performance relative to passing stats doesn’t tell us much about the effectiveness of their play-action usage."

I read that statement as more a lack of meaningful stats than a conclusive correlation one way or another between effectively running the ball and play action. Watering down the data creating a large sample size, individual team performance metrics (can they stop the run with their front 4 or do they have to commit more defenders...), situations like down and distance irrelevant because we all know play action on 3rd and short is just as effective as play action on 3rd and long right? 

The point here is that an NFL defender’s instincts are built on the foundation of those formative years. For that reason, NFL teams don’t need to establish the run, because the threatening nature of it has already been instilled throughout the amateur ranks.
(All facts here folks and no conjecture - who am I to argue with a guy who clearly never saw Edmunds play the run)

and lastly for the very folks that argued that you never need to run the ball at all - your article said this.
Obviously, if a team only ran play-action and never attempted to run the ball, defenses would begin to adjust. 
 

Begin to adjust 🤣

 

I am overwhelmed by the sheer factualness of this article.

 

 

 

Good for you. Now go read one of the other 100s that have been written on this subject over the last decade plus. 

[GoBills808]

29 minutes ago, WideNine said:

 

Some gems from that article of facts:

"The takeaway here is that once we’ve accounted for a team’s quarterback capabilities through PFF Grade (because that is always spot on), rushing rate and rushing performance relative to passing stats doesn’t tell us much about the effectiveness of their play-action usage."

I read that statement as more a lack of meaningful stats than a conclusive correlation one way or another between effectively running the ball and play action. Watering down the data creating a large sample size, individual team performance metrics (can they stop the run with their front 4 or do they have to commit more defenders...), situations like down and distance irrelevant because we all know play action on 3rd and short is just as effective as play action on 3rd and long right? 

The point here is that an NFL defender’s instincts are built on the foundation of those formative years. For that reason, NFL teams don’t need to establish the run, because the threatening nature of it has already been instilled throughout the amateur ranks.
(All facts here folks and no conjecture - who am I to argue with a guy who clearly never saw Edmunds play the run)

and lastly for the very folks that argued that you never need to run the ball at all - your article said this.
Obviously, if a team only ran play-action and never attempted to run the ball, defenses would begin to adjust. 
 

Begin to adjust 🤣

 

I am overwhelmed by the sheer factualness of this article.

 

 

 

I read that as a lack of faith in PFF passer grade tbh😂😂

[WideNine]

29 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

Good for you. Now go read one of the other 100s that have been written on this subject over the last decade plus. 

 

Sorry bud.

 

I took that a bit far... believe what you want and it is all good.

 

Enjoy the Bills win.

 

 

 

[HardyBoy]

6 hours ago, SoonerBillsFan said:

I posted last week he needed to be under center a lot more and got blasted for it.

 

Who blasted you for that take? Joe Marino, Cover 1 guys, national media people were all saying the same thing and they were right.

[Ethan in Cleveland]

It would be interesting to know what they mean by play action. Does that include in shotgun where they play RPO or fake a handful as well?

No matter what Rex says I have to believe play action is more effective when there is an actual threat of a run. 

Of course it is also more effective when you have the lead and the defense is more likely to expect a run.

Running play action down 10 in the fourth quarter can't do much. Up 10 in the fourth quarter and it has to be lethal. 

[Warcodered]

 

Zero point Zero?

 

[Motorin']

46 minutes ago, Ethan in Cleveland said:

It would be interesting to know what they mean by play action. Does that include in shotgun where they play RPO or fake a handful as well?

No matter what Rex says I have to believe play action is more effective when there is an actual threat of a run. 

Of course it is also more effective when you have the lead and the defense is more likely to expect a run.

Running play action down 10 in the fourth quarter can't do much. Up 10 in the fourth quarter and it has to be lethal. 

 

Aside from the fact that teams always run the ball to some degree (there's never been an NFL game with fewer than 5 rushing attempts by each team) it wouldn't be surprising if play action is effective when your running game wasn't. That means the defense is keyed in on stuffing your running game. And a defense focused on defending the run would be suspectable to play action. 

 

Not that you ever want your run game to be ineffective. 

 

You want to be able to run the ball effectively. 

 

And for all the guys saying you don't have to run at all, you don't want Josh Allen passing 50-60 times per game while running your rb's 9 times. That's how you lose to the Jacksonville Jaguars 6-9. 

 

And another thing to ponder. The Chiefs won the Super Bowl last year with Mahomes throwing 27 times for 180 yards while the Chiefs ran 26 times for 170 yards. 

 

I guess Andy Reid didn't get the memo that you don't have to run. 

 

 

 

[Thurman#1]

12 hours ago, FireChans said:

Prior to yesterday's beat down, Allen was 18 of 23 on play-action passes for 245 yards and two touchdowns.

 

Yesterday in play-action, Josh was 9/11 for 206 yards and 3 TD's. 

 

Need Dorsey to keep that going.

 

Some folks will say that the run game helps, which is understandable, but most of the data suggests that PA effectiveness is not predicated on run game success. So regardless, this is when Josh is at his most lethal.

 

 

We need Dorsey to keep that going?

 

What would make you think he's going to stop?

 

[Richard Noggin]

2 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

We need Dorsey to keep that going?

 

What would make you think he's going to stop?

 

 

Obviously it seems so...obvious.

 

Nevertheless, I had a bunch of friends and people near my seat gripe to me in-game, and also since the game, about all the running plays Dorsey calls on 1st down. So predictable and conservative. And predictably ineffective. And so on.

 

Except of course over the past two games I think at least 3 PASSING touchdowns were the result of play-action from under center. So...I don't know. Seems like compelling enough efficacy to maybe...NOT...whine about lazy cliches and otherwise be so rash to complain before we have proper context.

[Thurman#1]

4 hours ago, Motorin' said:

 

Aside from the fact that teams always run the ball to some degree (there's never been an NFL game with fewer than 5 rushing attempts by each team) it wouldn't be surprising if play action is effective when your running game wasn't. That means the defense is keyed in on stuffing your running game. And a defense focused on defending the run would be suspectable to play action. 

 

Not that you ever want your run game to be ineffective. 

 

You want to be able to run the ball effectively. 

 

And for all the guys saying you don't have to run at all, you don't want Josh Allen passing 50-60 times per game while running your rb's 9 times. That's how you lose to the Jacksonville Jaguars 6-9. 

 

And another thing to ponder. The Chiefs won the Super Bowl last year with Mahomes throwing 27 times for 180 yards while the Chiefs ran 26 times for 170 yards. 

 

I guess Andy Reid didn't get the memo that you don't have to run. 

 

 

 

 

 

IMO you're mixing up cause and effect here. 

 

It wasn't that the reason the Bills were terrible and lost to the Jags was that they only ran 9 times and threw it 47 times.

 

The reason the Bills lost to the Jags was that they couldn't run (22 yards on nine RB carries) and couldn't pass well (Allen's passer rating was 62.7). They sucked at both that game. They were terrible. That's why they lost. 

 

We only had 10 RB carries last year in the game we beat the Steelers 38 - 3. But in that game Allen played well, unlike his awful Jags game.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Richard Noggin said:

 

Obviously it seems so...obvious.

 

Nevertheless, I had a bunch of friends and people near my seat gripe to me in-game, and also since the game, about all the running plays Dorsey calls on 1st down. So predictable and conservative. And predictably ineffective. And so on.

 

Except of course over the past two games I think at least 3 PASSING touchdowns were the result of play-action from under center. So...I don't know. Seems like compelling enough efficacy to maybe...NOT...whine about lazy cliches and otherwise be so rash to complain before we have proper context.

 

 

Yeah, some people complain about strange things. I don't see how people talking Bills offense can complain about anything about yesterday's game. The offense was nearly as good as the defense. And that's extremely good.

 

But again, it's been proven over and over again that you do NOT have to run a lot, or even run successfully, for play action to work.

 

People (some of them, anyway) maybe think Dorsey should stop running, you say. Not me, but some. But does that really mean that we think he will stop running play action when it's so successful?

 

 

Edited October 3, 2023 by Thurman#1

[Sierra Foothills]

12 hours ago, SoonerBillsFan said:

I posted last week he needed to be under center a lot more and got blasted for it.

 

Shut up stupid face!!!

 

12 hours ago, McBean said:

Can you imagine Josh with Kyle Shannahan 

 

Let's try to stick to football.

 

12 hours ago, Motorin' said:

OMG, these people who think math is the real world, instead of an approximate of specific circumstances at specific moments.

 

Probably still the people that insist math is broken because Josh Allen was able to complete mor Ethan 50% of his passes. 

 

You leave @Ethan in Cleveland out of this!

 

11 hours ago, Julio Hopkins said:

Play action, pre-snap motion, and misdirection.  The absolute keys the Dolphins offense.  You know who else?  Literally every offense in football.  Defenses by nature are at a supreme disadvantage because they have to react to the offense.  

 

Shouldn't your last name also start with a "J"?

 

9 hours ago, NewEra said:

Agreed, but mix in some shotgun.  I think diversity is important. Anyone have a breakdown of shotgun to under center snaps from this game?

 

 

Wrong forum...

 

[Utah John]

Having two good guards for the first time while Josh has been in Buffalo means a whole lot of things have gotten better quickly.  Cook is the same guy who struggled most of last year, and now he's ripping off 8 or 10 yards at a go.  That added balance makes everything else harder to defend.  

[Motorin']

6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

IMO you're mixing up cause and effect here. 

 

It wasn't that the reason the Bills were terrible and lost to the Jags was that they only ran 9 times and threw it 47 times.

 

The reason the Bills lost to the Jags was that they couldn't run (22 yards on nine RB carries) and couldn't pass well (Allen's passer rating was 62.7). They sucked at both that game. They were terrible. That's why they lost. 

 

We only had 10 RB carries last year in the game we beat the Steelers 38 - 3. But in that game Allen played well, unlike his awful Jags game.

 

 

 

 

Yeah, some people complain about strange things. I don't see how people talking Bills offense can complain about anything about yesterday's game. The offense was nearly as good as the defense. And that's extremely good.

 

But again, it's been proven over and over again that you do NOT have to run a lot, or even run successfully, for play action to work.

 

People (some of them, anyway) maybe think Dorsey should stop running, you say. Not me, but some. But does that really mean that we think he will stop running play action when it's so successful?

 

 

 

We ran the ball 18 times for 125 yards against the Steelers. The RB's averaged nearly 5 yards per carry. 

 

And completed 20 passes for 424 yards and 4 TD's.

 

That's not a very good example of not running the ball often or effectively. 

 

This Bills offense needs balance. It needs production from the running backs to take pressure off of Josh Allen's shoulders. And that's exactly what has propelled this team to back to back to back 28 points victories. 

 

I don't know about you, but I'd love to reduce the amount of contact Josh takes every single season moving forward. That's how we have him for another 10 years instead of him retiring in his early 30's. 

 

In any event, the point of the offense isn't for play action to be effective. It's to control and win games. 

 

Sure we're going to be able to blow out bad teams doing whatever we want. But against really good teams, in the playoffs and Super Bowl, we are going to need to control the line of scrimmage and run the ball effectively. 

 

And the better this Bills team is at running the ball, the better it will be for Josh and the passing game.

 

I don't care how many times people say "you don't have to run the ball for play action to be effective." It's a stupid point to make. 

 

Unless we're playing a team with a terrible defense in February, if we can't run the ball effectively, it's going to be a very long day for our QB. 

[RunTheBall]

The missing piece to this offense over the last years has been an effective running game. Yes, I know we’ve run the ball before but I think everyone can see with their eyes that we are more effective this year.

 

The main reason is 1) Upgraded guards 2) Year 2 of Kromer 3) Not trying to run wide zone when gap runs are more effective for us 4) Spencer Brown has not been the disaster everyone predicted (he’s always been good in run game tho) 5) Murray / Harris are awesome signings and I think both will get more involved as the season progresses.

 

As for play action, many were calling for more Josh under center and more PA and the results speak for themselves.

 

PA can be effective without a good running game. I believe it’s more effective, especially on 2nd/3rd and short, if you’ve been running the ball down their throats.

[Bookie Man]

I've wanted more commitment to the running game for years. Many disagreed bc they didn't want to take the ball out of Josh's hands. But what they don't understand is the quality of his play when the ball IS in his hands will outweigh the volume of him passing all the time. The offense hums when we establish the running game. 

[FireChans]

8 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

We need Dorsey to keep that going?

 

What would make you think he's going to stop?

 

Lots of coordinators get cute and try new things and get too far away from what’s working.

[HoofHearted]

I like that we're 4 pages in and OL blocking scheme hasn't been brought up once.

[Simon]

12 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

I like that we're 4 pages in and OL blocking scheme hasn't been brought up once.

 

Well, it has now.

It's probably because 90+% of the people here don't have a firm grasp of it, myself included.

 

Would you care to enlighten us?

In English?

[HoofHearted]

1 minute ago, Simon said:

 

Well, it has now.

It's probably because 90+% of the people here don't have a firm grasp of it, myself included.

 

Would you care to enlighten us?

In English?

The mesh is just one part of the formula for what sells the action as a whole. The blocking scheme up front is another part of that formula. You want your pass protection to mirror the same look as one of your run schemes. The easiest, and probably most prevalent in the NFL when under center, is to mimic stretch since the OL is moving horizontally. We did this a number of times this past week. Dorsey actually dialed up a really cool protection where they showed stretch blocking and after about a two or three count Morse spun back to pick up the free edge rusher (it was the big pass to Cook on the sideline). This is why RPOs are so successful though. You can scheme to get a linebacker to go wherever you want them to go, and if they don't then just hand it off because they won't have the numbers to fit the run.

[HappyDays]

7 hours ago, HoofHearted said:

Dorsey actually dialed up a really cool protection where they showed stretch blocking and after about a two or three count Morse spun back to pick up the free edge rusher (it was the big pass to Cook on the sideline).

 

It was a cool protection except for the fact that Morse never got his feet set and got driven back into Josh's lap. Diggs was open for a deep curl about 20 yards downfield but Josh couldn't get a good platform. Luckily he is a magician and created a big play out of nothing.

 

Edited October 4, 2023 by HappyDays

[Mikie2times]

 

I remember posting about Josh and PA after we drafted him. A lot of people questioned his accuracy, timing, and mechanics. You would have a very difficult time finding any tape from Wyoming in which he wasn't in rhythm on PA. If Josh has a sliver he can fit it in. He doesn't have that much guess work on PA. It's usually simplified reads. More often than not he will get some window and he just rips it with no hesitation when it happens.