Wide Receiver Train Full Speed Ahead- CHOO CHOO!

[finn]

15 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

What I think you discount is the importance of being clutch on offense.    Allen and the offense have choked in the clutch with victory in sight in 3 of 4 chances against Houston and KC.      

 

I really couldn't care less about counting points allowed against the Chiefs anymore.    The games were eminently winnable.  Bills fans are just myopic on the topic.

 

The Kansas City defense averages allowing just over 30 points per game in the SB with Mahomes.

 

But has won 3 of 5 because they've produced in the clutch offensively.

 

Tyreek came up huge the first one.   Kelce has been surreal in the clutch over and over.   His playoff numbers are unreal.   Worthy tore the Bills up in the AFCCG.    

 

Meanwhile........Allen has had the vanishing choke artist Diggs and a bunch of forgettable nobodies.    The one game where Allen looked clutch at the end was when a receiver put up a 200 yard game.  

 

 

 

 

Yet Beane shrugs off the need for a top WR by pointing out that Brady didn't have one, ignoring his having Edelman and a HOF tight end. 

[NewEra]

15 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

What I think you discount is the importance of being clutch on offense.    Allen and the offense have choked in the clutch with victory in sight in 3 of 4 chances against Houston and KC.      

 

I really couldn't care less about counting points allowed against the Chiefs anymore.    The games were eminently winnable.  Bills fans are just myopic on the topic.

 

The Kansas City defense averages allowing just over 30 points per game in the SB with Mahomes.

 

But has won 3 of 5 because they've produced in the clutch offensively.

 

Tyreek came up huge the first one.   Kelce has been surreal in the clutch over and over.   His playoff numbers are unreal.   Worthy tore the Bills up in the AFCCG.    

 

Meanwhile........Allen has had the vanishing choke artist Diggs and a bunch of forgettable nobodies.    The one game where Allen looked clutch at the end was when a receiver put up a 200 yard game.  

 

 

 

 

Yes-  again-  I’ve acknowledged this many times.

 

In the chiefs 2 Super Bowl losses the opposing QBs were sitting on the sideline watching their backups on their final drive iirc.  It’s possible for teams to not need a final drive to be clutch vs KC. 
 

our defense is the biggest reason we haven’t beat KC in the playoffs.  Disagree if you like.  You’d just be wrong.  

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, finn said:

Yet Beane shrugs off the need for a top WR by pointing out that Brady didn't have one, ignoring his having Edelman and a HOF tight end. 

Again if Beane decides to trade a bunch of guys to get say a Jefferson, fine.  But when are folks going to objectively look back at last season and realize that we had a great offense without a star WR?  That Brady’s offense uses the running game effectively as well as spreading the passing game around to all the WRs, TEs, and RBs?  When is that going to happen?  And please don’t come back with the idea that we’d be lost if we didn’t have Josh, because the fact is we DO have Josh.  Just like the Chiefs have Mahomes without a stud WR.

[finn]

11 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Again if Beane decides to trade a bunch of guys to get say a Jefferson, fine.  But when are folks going to objectively look back at last season and realize that we had a great offense without a star WR?  That Brady’s offense uses the running game effectively as well as spreading the passing game around to all the WRs, TEs, and RBs?  When is that going to happen?  And please don’t come back with the idea that we’d be lost if we didn’t have Josh, because the fact is we DO have Josh.  Just like the Chiefs have Mahomes without a stud WR.

You're implying you're fine with returning offense with the same level of production as last year. So I assume you're also fine with losing in the playoffs again with the same "great offense"? Fourth down with the game on the line and KC blitzing, only this time Kincaid (or Coleman or Palmer or Moore or Shenault or another of our deep threats) catches the ball, like Diggs failed the year before?

 

Or maybe you're saying the defense will be so improved we don't need an offense that can score on the final drive of a game. In other words, we don't need the "great offense" you say we have. 

 

[oldmanfan]

4 minutes ago, finn said:

You're implying you're fine with returning offense with the same level of production as last year. So I assume you're also fine with losing in the playoffs again with the same "great offense"? Fourth down with the game on the line and KC blitzing, only this time Kincaid (or Coleman or Palmer or Moore or Shenault or another of our deep threats) catches the ball, like Diggs failed the year before?

 

Or maybe you're saying the defense will be so improved we don't need an offense that can score on the final drive of a game. In other words, we don't need the "great offense" you say we have. 

 

Oh for God sakes.  Just stop with this.  You do not define an entire offense by one play in a season.  The Bills offense scored the most points in the league last year, and a great defensive call by Spagnolo kept us from going to the dance.  By any objective measure the Bills had a great offense last year.  I see no reason why it won’t be among the best in the league again this season.

[LEBills]

30 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Again if Beane decides to trade a bunch of guys to get say a Jefferson, fine.  But when are folks going to objectively look back at last season and realize that we had a great offense without a star WR?  That Brady’s offense uses the running game effectively as well as spreading the passing game around to all the WRs, TEs, and RBs?  When is that going to happen?  And please don’t come back with the idea that we’d be lost if we didn’t have Josh, because the fact is we DO have Josh.  Just like the Chiefs have Mahomes without a stud WR.

Everyone know we had a great offense last year. No one is arguing that fact here. I’d say most posters are glad that we went defense heavy in the draft too because the defense certainly needed help.

 

However, many of us are concerned that the offensive performance will not be sustainable with the current talent level. Josh performed at an MVP level last year to get those results. There have only been 4 QBs to win MVP in back to back seasons because sustaining that level is hard. We are concerned that the same receiving corp as last year with Josh Palmer and Elijah Moore swapped out for Cooper and Hollins is still very lackluster. Even Mahomes has always had Kelce and either Tyreek or Rice in the super bowls he has won. And a WR room with Rice and Worthy is not amazing but is pretty good especially if Rice returns to averaging 96 yards/game like he was prior to his injury.

 

I hope Brady can scheme things around to get production out of our other offensive weapons like he did last year. I hope Josh isn’t going to have to be Superman each week to make plays happen in the passing game. We all just want the Bills to win.

[finn]

14 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Oh for God sakes.  Just stop with this.  You do not define an entire offense by one play in a season.  The Bills offense scored the most points in the league last year, and a great defensive call by Spagnolo kept us from going to the dance.  By any objective measure the Bills had a great offense last year.  I see no reason why it won’t be among the best in the league again this season.

You're missing my point, I hope not deliberately. I'm not disputing that the Bills offense will score as many points as last year or gain as many yards. I'm focusing on the playoffs, when it counts the most, right? Are we on the same page there, or are you content with a nice record in the regular season, along with a win or two against the Broncos or whomever? If you are, speak up. 

 

I'll put a finer point on it for you: Beane stood pat on an offense that couldn't deliver in the clutch the last two years. He prioritized a weak defense instead, which is understandable. But let's not delude ourselves that this is a "great offense." A great offense doesn't choke on its final drive of the playoffs. Essentially, Beane is betting it won't come down to the final drive.

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, finn said:

You're missing my point, I hope not deliberately. I'm not disputing that the Bills offense will score as many points as last year or gain as many yards. I'm focusing on the playoffs, when it counts the most, right? Are we on the same page there, or are you content with a nice record in the regular season, along with a win or two against the Broncos or whomever? If you are, speak up. 

 

I'll put a finer point on it for you: Beane stood pat on an offense that couldn't deliver in the clutch the last two years. He prioritized a weak defense instead, which is understandable. But let's not delude ourselves that this is a "great offense." A great offense doesn't choke on its final drive of the playoffs. Essentially, Beane is betting it won't come down to the final drive.

I hope you are not deliberately trying to state that I don’t care about winning a Lombardi, because I think you know how ridiculous that would be.  I challenge the idea that Beane stood pat.  They wanted some more downfield potential in the WR corps.  Many complained about separation ability.  So they brought Palmer in who ranks high in separation ability, and a speedier guy in Moore.  I’m not sure how that downgrades from last year.  
 

I would remind you and others of the conversation this time last year.  People were laughing about Hollins, but he turned out to be a pretty good addition.  We laugh right now but maybe Shavers now fills that role; he certainly can contribute on special teams.  Last year folks talked about how Shakir wouldn’t step up, but he did.  This year it’s all about Coleman, as if a rookie WR cannot possibly improve his second year.  
 

As far as grading our offense last year on the basis of one play (which was a great call by Spags, and even then Kincaid should have caught it), I would refer to Statistics 101.  I am using an entire season to base conclusions.  You are relying apparently on a sample size of N =1.  An N=- doesn’t have meaning.

Edited 2 hours ago by oldmanfan

[transient]

1 hour ago, finn said:

You're implying you're fine with returning offense with the same level of production as last year. So I assume you're also fine with losing in the playoffs again with the same "great offense"? Fourth down with the game on the line and KC blitzing, only this time Kincaid (or Coleman or Palmer or Moore or Shenault or another of our deep threats) catches the ball, like Diggs failed the year before?

 

Or maybe you're saying the defense will be so improved we don't need an offense that can score on the final drive of a game. In other words, we don't need the "great offense" you say we have. 

 

It wasn't the final drive of the game. The final drive of that 3 point game effectively ended when KC picked up 12 yds on a 3rd and 7 and then ran out the clock. But hey, details...

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, LEBills said:

Everyone know we had a great offense last year. No one is arguing that fact here. I’d say most posters are glad that we went defense heavy in the draft too because the defense certainly needed help.

 

However, many of us are concerned that the offensive performance will not be sustainable with the current talent level. Josh performed at an MVP level last year to get those results. There have only been 4 QBs to win MVP in back to back seasons because sustaining that level is hard. We are concerned that the same receiving corp as last year with Josh Palmer and Elijah Moore swapped out for Cooper and Hollins is still very lackluster. Even Mahomes has always had Kelce and either Tyreek or Rice in the super bowls he has won. And a WR room with Rice and Worthy is not amazing but is pretty good especially if Rice returns to averaging 96 yards/game like he was prior to his injury.

 

I hope Brady can scheme things around to get production out of our other offensive weapons like he did last year. I hope Josh isn’t going to have to be Superman each week to make plays happen in the passing game. We all just want the Bills to win.

Agree with your last sentence.  You can see my remarks to Finn above.  Those said if Beane pulled off some kind of stunning trade for a guy like Jefferson, fine by me.  But our offense will be top 10 regardless 

[LEBills]

6 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Agree with your last sentence.  You can see my remarks to Finn above.  Those said if Beane pulled off some kind of stunning trade for a guy like Jefferson, fine by me.  But our offense will be top 10 regardless 

I hope so, hoping it doesn’t all fall on Josh to be Superman all year on offense.

[RoscoeParrish]

2 hours ago, NewEra said:

Yes-  again-  I’ve acknowledged this many times.

 

In the chiefs 2 Super Bowl losses the opposing QBs were sitting on the sideline watching their backups on their final drive iirc.  It’s possible for teams to not need a final drive to be clutch vs KC. 
 

our defense is the biggest reason we haven’t beat KC in the playoffs.  Disagree if you like.  You’d just be wrong.  

I think we have a tendency to conflate beating the Chiefs with winning the Super Bowl.

 

the offense was awesome last year. I’m not sure if we did squeak past the Chiefs if we would have beaten the Eagles.

 

I think that’s where the star power argument has some legs. I don’t think we NEED a superstar at WR any more than we NEED a superstar at CB. But we do need superstars to rattle off 4 playoff wins or we need Josh to have a Flacco-type run. Jmo

[oldmanfan]

6 minutes ago, LEBills said:

I hope so, hoping it doesn’t all fall on Josh to be Superman all year on offense.

I guess I would argue that it’s great to have a great QB.  To me the focus now should be on reupping Cook

Edited 2 hours ago by oldmanfan

[DrDawkinstein]

22 minutes ago, LEBills said:

I hope so, hoping it doesn’t all fall on Josh to be Superman all year on offense.

 

The best way to complement your MVP QB and make his job easier is to field a Defense that can get more stops on 3rd down and get off the field.

 

Even getting Josh the best WRs in the game would still put it on him to have to make plays and out-score the opponent who is scoring on every possession.

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by DrDawkinstein

[hondo in seattle]

2 hours ago, finn said:

Yet Beane shrugs off the need for a top WR by pointing out that Brady didn't have one, ignoring his having Edelman and a HOF tight end. 

 

Beane's argument isn't that simple.  

 

He's also mentioned that we scored 30 points in 8 consecutive games and were the highest scoring team in the NFL last season if you include the playoffs.  The offense was productive even without an elite receiver so maybe that wasn't our biggest need.    

And he's pointed out, reasonably enough, that you can have All Pros everywhere.  The cap doesn't allow that.

 

I believe that if you have a unicorn QB, you ought to prioritize two things: the OL and your stable of WRs.  I don't think Beane's done that.  It seems we either have a good OL, or a good group of WRs, but never both at the same time.  Still, there are rational arguments you can make for his approach.  

[Matt_In_NH]

3 hours ago, finn said:

Yet Beane shrugs off the need for a top WR by pointing out that Brady didn't have one, ignoring his having Edelman and a HOF tight end. 

What is your counter to the Bills had a very successful offense?  They scored points, a lot of them and did not turn it over.  Even more than many of those Brady teams.  When Brady had his best weapons they won nothing with Welker and Moss they did not win. What did they have in 2001-2004?

[finn]

50 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I hope you are not deliberately trying to state that I don’t care about winning a Lombardi, because I think you know how ridiculous that would be.  I challenge the idea that Beane stood pat.  They wanted some more downfield potential in the WR corps.  Many complained about separation ability.  So they brought Palmer in who ranks high in separation ability, and a speedier guy in Moore.  I’m not sure how that downgrades from last year.  
 

I would remind you and others of the conversation this time last year.  People were laughing about Hollins, but he turned out to be a pretty good addition.  We laugh right now but maybe Shavers now fills that role; he certainly can contribute on special teams.  Last year folks talked about how Shakir wouldn’t step up, but he did.  This year it’s all about Coleman, as if a rookie WR cannot possibly improve his second year.  
 

As far as grading our offense last year on the basis of one play (which was a great call by Spags, and even then Kincaid should have caught it), I would refer to Statistics 101.  I am using an entire season to base conclusions.  You are relying apparently on a sample size of N =1.  An N=- doesn’t have meaning.

The only N that counts is Super Bowl wins, as Josh Allen is always saying, and that N=0. Great that Hollins and Shakir exceeded expectations last year, not so great that Coleman and Kincaid did not. I'm sure this year, too, some players will step up on offense and some will not. I'm hopeful--I'm always hopeful--that this year is the year they go all the way. Could happen. But I think Beane's improvements on defense won't come to full fruition until next year, and I don't think his tweaks on offense amount to more than treading water. 

 

Note: This is about when the ad hominen attacks usually begin. Let's try to keep it civil, ok?

[LEBills]

Just now, oldmanfan said:

I guess I would argue that it’s great to have a great QB.

It is, but even the best QBs, which Josh is, need good skill position players. 

 

10 minutes ago, DrDawkinstein said:

 

The best way to complement your MVP QB and make his job easier is to field a Defense that can get more stops on 3rd down and get off the field.

 

Even getting Josh the best WRs in the game would still put it on him to have to make plays and out-score the opponent who is scoring on every possession.

 

 

If our defense turns out that way that will be great. This type of argument goes round and round in circles tho. “More weapons will help more.” “No a better defense will help more”

 

I fall more on the former argument because I trust Josh to get more out of talent than our coaches.
 

But quite simply we needed improvement on both sides of the ball. The defense got overhauled this year, hopefully we have enough on offense too.

[oldmanfan]

1 minute ago, finn said:

The only N that counts is Super Bowl wins, as Josh Allen is always saying, and that N=0. Great that Hollins and Shakir exceeded expectations last year, not so great that Coleman and Kincaid did not. I'm sure this year, too, some players will step up on offense and some will not. I'm hopeful--I'm always hopeful--that this year is the year they go all the way. Could happen. But I think Beane's improvements on defense won't come to full fruition until next year, and I don't think his tweaks on offense amount to more than treading water. 

 

Note: This is about when the ad hominen attacks usually begin. Let's try to keep it civil, ok?

Absolutely, let’s be civil.  I don’t think our offense is going to be any worse than last season based on the changes made.  Only thing on paper now that could negatively affect things is if Cook sits out, but I don’t see that happening.  Of course, you can’t predict injuries and such.

 

I am intrigued by the changes on D.  I think we’ll be stronger up front, about the same at LB, and the DBs are going to be a battle.  

4 minutes ago, LEBills said:

It is, but even the best QBs, which Josh is, need good skill position players. 

 

If our defense turns out that way that will be great. This type of argument goes round and round in circles tho. “More weapons will help more.” “No a better defense will help more”

 

I fall more on the former argument because I trust Josh to get more out of talent than our coaches.
 

But quite simply we needed improvement on both sides of the ball. The defense got overhauled this year, hopefully we have enough on offense too.

Yep, agree on all counts.  Can’t wait for camp to start.

[finn]

7 minutes ago, Matt_In_NH said:

What is your counter to the Bills had a very successful offense?  They scored points, a lot of them and did not turn it over.  Even more than many of those Brady teams.  When Brady had his best weapons they won nothing with Welker and Moss they did not win. What did they have in 2001-2004?

My counter is that the offense wasn't good enough in the playoffs last, so it stands to reason it won't be enough this year, given what little Beane has changed (let's assume that, yes, some players will improve but others will disappoint or get injured, as happens most every year). Last year, it got bailed out by the defense against Baltimore and failed on its final drive with the game on the line. 

 

In other words, does it matter that the offense didn't turn the ball over and scored lots of points if they keep losing in the playoffs? We're so used to blaming the defense that we forget that Diggs dropped that pass, Bass missed that field goal, Dawkins missed that block, Kincaid didn't make that kick, and pretty much no one showed up against the Bengals. The facts are plain: The offense hasn't been good enough.