Is there an NFL team with a weaker WR group than the Bills?

[Alphadawg7]

5 hours ago, Pete said:

We’ve covered this a few times.  Bills offense scored 62 TD.  Cook had 18. Josh ran for 12 TD, and caught 1 TD. Ty and Ray combined for 9 TD.  That totals 40 TDs, or 65% of all offensive TDs.  
 

Mac Hollins led all Bills WR with 5 TD.  Amari had 2 TD.  7 TD out the door, or 11%.
 

So that there is 76% of Bills 62 touchdowns in 2024.

 

Josh and Running Backs are doing all of the heavy lifting(and the offensive line).

 

Time for the 24% to step up, and start pulling their load.  

 

Weird, I could have sworn a TD was worth 6 points regardless of who scored it.  

[Alphadawg7]

3 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I think that this is a major part of the disconnect. Just because he doesn’t “need” a number 1 doesn’t mean that the offense wouldn’t be better with one. That’s obvious. The question becomes, can they keep winning with a bottom 5 WR room? We all hope so. Would they be better off if you plugged Metcalf at the top of the depth chart (for example)? Of course they would.
 

You need to remember that the Bills were +24 in turnover differential last year. No other team was more than +16. Other than that no other team was more than +12!! That’s a massive gap. If the Bills even fall to 3rd best in turnover differential we are talking about almost an extra turnover a game that they either commit on offense or don’t get on defense. This is often lost in these conversations. The Bills had the fewest negative plays ever (turnovers and sacks). We shouldn’t expect that again or even close to it. When that regresses, even if it’s still good, will the playmakers around Josh be good enough to overcome it? 

 

Definitely fair to not expect the same historical level in terms of fewest negative plays.  If I was to make a counter point, it would be that it doesn't also mean you should by default expect a significant reversal either.  

 

Regarding our TO differential, I think the bigger concern for me is how dependent our defense was on getting turnovers, and that is a much harder thing to replicate IMO.  Bills defense was bottom of the league in 3rd down conversions and first downs allowed.  Any drop in those turnovers and that defense would have been putrid.  

 

Good news is they really reset the D this year, so going into next year the runway is clear to be aggressive at WR if needed with fewer expected holes next offseason.  And knowing Beane, if someone comes available during the season, he has shown he would be aggressive and make an in season move if he felt it was the right move.  

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, oldmanfan said:

I thought you and I had reached a point where we could discuss things collegiality.  But I guess I was wrong.  My very first sentence I said if Beane had traded for Metcalf or swung a deal for a guy like Jefferson, what did I say?  Fine.  I then just threw out a theoretical on how that might affect the offense as constructed by Brady, and you give me this.

 

Let me know if you want to be collegial or not.  If so, great.  If not then let’s just ignore each other’s posts.

You asked a question and I answered. Having better players isn’t a bad thing. If the Bills had a 1 and threw him the ball 8 times a game and that meant 1 less target for Moore, Palmer and Coleman, I wouldn’t care. Over the course of the year they’d each see 15 less targets, or whatever, and an elite receiver adds those 45, the Bills will be better.

Edited 8 hours ago by Kirby Jackson

[stinky finger]

2 hours ago, Mikie2times said:

It can be both right? I know people are thinking with these defensive additions and the prolific offense we just won't play in anymore close games. But in all likelihood we will have to win at least one game by scoring with under 2 minutes left if we want to win a Super Bowl. Most teams have at least one game like that and sometimes two while they make a run. We have lost back to back years after the defense failed AND the offense failed in that situation. Offensively that failure was largely our skill position players not making critical plays. It is both things. The more nuclear of the two WAS the defense. Just sort of irritating to have so many people act as if the other problem doesn't exist because we score a lot of points in lower leverage spots. I could really care less how many points we score in the regular season or even how many points we score in the playoffs. Do we have the horses to execute in a high leverage spot with the game on the line with the Lombardi on the line? 

 

Sure, it can be both. But it really isn't both. The D has either struggled to get off the field or failed to get to the QB in key situations. Their approach to the draft and FA is no coincidence. 

[Kirby Jackson]

51 minutes ago, HamptonBillsfan said:

Historical output with bad QBs and offensive attacks doesn’t compare to Josh and our O-line. I agree we’re not expecting our two wideouts to be the Bengals receivers but expect Moore, Palmer and our 2nd year receiver (Coleman) and our 1st round drafted TE (Kincaid) to be markedly improved.

I agree that they will be improved. I’m asking if the regression in terms of negative plays is greater than their improvement? 

[Kirby Jackson]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Definitely fair to not expect the same historical level in terms of fewest negative plays.  If I was to make a counter point, it would be that it doesn't also mean you should by default expect a significant reversal either.  

 

Regarding our TO differential, I think the bigger concern for me is how dependent our defense was on getting turnovers, and that is a much harder thing to replicate IMO.  Bills defense was bottom of the league in 3rd down conversions and first downs allowed.  Any drop in those turnovers and that defense would have been putrid.  

 

Good news is they really reset the D this year, so going into next year the runway is clear to be aggressive at WR if needed with fewer expected holes next offseason.  And knowing Beane, if someone comes available during the season, he has shown he would be aggressive and make an in season move if he felt it was the right move.  

That’s kind of what I think Alpha. They’ll get less turnovers but more stops. I wonder what that does to average drive start? I have no idea but the improved defense will definitely help.

[Doc Brown]

1 hour ago, Kirby Jackson said:

I agree that they will be improved. I’m asking if the regression in terms of negative plays is greater than their improvement? 

Pry not but if it can even come close to last year we're already in a better position given how heavily we invested in defense this off season.  I know it's said every off-season but getting the #1 seed is vital for obvious reasons.  Especially with on paper the 5th easiest schedule based off over/under betting odds.  Our division has never been weaker.  Almost all the tough games this year (Chiefs, Eagles, Bengals, Ravens, Bucs) will be played at home.  Houston's pry are toughest road game but we'd pry be favored right now.  Barring an injury to Allen there's no excuses to not get the #1 seed imo..  It's the one situational variable that we haven't had the last five years in the playoffs.

[Mikie2times]

1 hour ago, stinky finger said:

 

Sure, it can be both. But it really isn't both. The D has either struggled to get off the field or failed to get to the QB in key situations. Their approach to the draft and FA is no coincidence. 

We had the ball with under 2 minutes back to back years and a chance to take the lead and did nothing. You can pretend that means nothing if you want. You can pretend that these defensive additions will prevent us from that scenario again. You can pretend this group of skilled guys are the type to elevate us in the final moments vs the best in the game. Any degree of logic points to none of that being true. Still doesn’t mean we didn’t need defensive help

more. 

[Alphadawg7]

37 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

That’s kind of what I think Alpha. They’ll get less turnovers but more stops. I wonder what that does to average drive start? I have no idea but the improved defense will definitely help.

 

Yeah, and if they do get a couple more stops that means more drives and scoring opportunities for the offense.  And like we agree, totally reasonable to not expect another season of the fewest negative plays in history.  But lets say Josh gets sacked 15 more times this year, that is just 15 plays over a course of the season...not even one a game.  So it doesn't mean they were all drive ending sacks, if any.  Sack on first down or 2nd down and we can still pick up the first and keep the drive alive and go on to score. 

 

So even with a reasonably expected regression to some degree in the fewest negative plays category, it doesn't necessarily mean it will significantly impact our PPG, if even at all.  Now add in the aspect the defense hopefully getting off the field a couple more times a game and putting the ball back in Josh's hands and potentially with better field position, we very well could see our scoring go up even above our historic scoring season last year.  

 

Im really excited to see this team on the field.  All of this is speculation until the games are played, and we have a lot of young players who will be expected to contribute early or take a step this year, so nothing is assured.  But today, before we see it on the field, this feels like the most talented roster that maybe Josh has had to date top to bottom.  

 

Still won't be an easy path though, Ravens got some people in the draft I would have preferred to see go elsewhere.  KC is still gonna be tough too, especially with Rice back.  

 

 

[eball]

5 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

You can pretend that means nothing if you want.

I think the real point is that while it doesn’t mean nothing, it also doesn’t mean everything. Bass missed a tying FG, and the KC defense made a great call on 4th down while Kincaid dropped the ball. 
 

The Bills defense in the playoffs has been pretty bad. If they are just a little bit better, we probably win those games. 
 

[Mikie2times]

35 minutes ago, eball said:

I think the real point is that while it doesn’t mean nothing, it also doesn’t mean everything. Bass missed a tying FG, and the KC defense made a great call on 4th down while Kincaid dropped the ball. 
 

The Bills defense in the playoffs has been pretty bad. If they are just a little bit better, we probably win those games. 
 

It seems possible or even likely we would win, but I would say that conversation shifts more to us knowing how to utilize those new assets defensively vs if Allen is being better served in doing so. I don’t have a horse in this race to be honest. I just don’t think we all of a sudden will be in a position to protect leads come playoff time because of this investment. We have had very good defenses prior with very poor playoff results.
 

Is this investment chasing bad money with good? Does that even matter because the talent sucked so much it had to happen regardless? Just not overly confident in that side of the ball fulfilling its destiny as a playoff elite squad.  I wish we could have juiced both sides a little but understood we only have so much to go around. We will see, at the very least I’m excited to see what these rookies can do and even more excited to see some actual change to our schemes (I hope). 

[Billsfed1]

While we may not rank as a duo very high, with all the acquisitions Beane made at WR I think it will be a pretty good year…better than most people think at this point.

 

Also you don’t want to do everything the same year after year.  Wrinkles are required every offseason to avoid being predictable and with Beane making the moves he did, I expect there to be an uptick in the passing game.  

 

If Josh hits around 4000 yards like he does every year does it really matter what it looks like

 

 

[Pete]

7 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Weird, I could have sworn a TD was worth 6 points regardless of who scored it.  

Weird that you cant follow math.  76% of Offensive TDs is quite explicit for most.  Of course a TD is still worth 6 points.  So for Alpha Dude - 76% of 6 point Offensive TDs in 2024 were scored by Josh, RBs, and departed WR.

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

Weird that you cant follow math.  76% of Offensive TDs is quite explicit for most.  Of course a TD is still worth 6 points.  So for Alpha Dude - 76% of 6 point Offensive TDs in 2024 were scored by Josh, RBs, and departed WR.

 

This isn't baseball where some HR hitter leaves and suddenly that team loses a bunch of HR's unless they speciffically bring people in to make up for them because those are individual feats, not team feats.  This is a team sport where TD's are a function of the 11 guys on the field doing their jobs.  Just because a player leaves does not automatically mean the team is no longer capable of still scoring those TD's that "departed".  

 

When we step on the field, there will be 11 guys on it just like last year.  Our best players are all returning and we lost the Ghost of Cooper and Mack Hollins who combined to avg just 4.3 rec per game.  I am pretty sure between Keon healthy again and no longer splitting time, Kincaid and Samuel healthy, the additions of Palmer and Moore that we can safely say the group we are putting on the field is capable of making up for that minimal lost production and the TD's too.  

 

And as far as the rushing TD's...we have a great OL, a tank of a QB who is the most dangerous runner at QB in the redzone maybe in league history, and a great RB room...of course that is going to result in a lot of ground TD's, and it should, as its a much lower risk and higher percentage play then trying to throw in a short field deep in the redzone. 
 

Having at least 30 scores on the ground and 30 passing is like every team and coaches wet dream.  

 

So for me...I am not personally concerned about what left or how many of those we scores came on the ground.  

Edited just now by Alphadawg7