Tired of "everyone eats".

[Kirby Jackson]

16 minutes ago, MasterStrategist said:

Numbers are the numbers, thats fine.  But it wasn't Coop all himself- in fact little to do with him IMO.

 

Just like we didnt put up record numbers on offense, because of Coop.  Low turnovers on offense, defense forcing turnovers--- all led to higher scoring.  Point is, stats are a real reflection of results, but what was the catalyst?  Thats where eye test says "not cooper".  Playing fundamentally sound/very efficient offense, behind an MVP performance from Josh --- that's the reason.   If we traded for the second coming of Kelvin Benjamin, we still get similar output. 

Again, with the “yeah but.” 🤣🤣

 

The numbers that I posted are Cooper with the Bills 2024 vs. Cooperless Bills games in 2024. You can attribute it to whatever you want (for the 2nd time). The FACT (not up for debate) is that the Bills threw for significantly more yards and scored significantly more points in the games that he was in the lineup. That’s not up for discussion or debate. It just IS.

[MasterStrategist]

Just now, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, with the “yeah but.” 🤣🤣

 

The numbers that I posted are Cooper with the Bills 2024 vs. Cooperless Bills games in 2024. You can attribute it to whatever you want (for the 2nd time). The FACT (not up for debate) is that the Bills threw for significantly more yards and scored significantly more points in the games that he was in the lineup. That’s not up for discussion or debate. It just IS.

What snaps did he play?  Was he in the game for how many passing yards/points scored?

 

Legit questions - if you want to attribute success to him being on the roster.  

 

We also had Alec Anderson taking significant snaps last year ---- maybe it was him playing as 6th OL?  

 

Kidding aside, this isnt a "yeah but".  Its how much do you attribute success to Cooper?  

 

You do realize teams improve throughout the year, players improve --- lots of reasons to say our offense got better in those final 8 games, just because a player was added who played less than 50% of snaps and had marginal success, we cant say "oh yeah, Cooper is the only the difference between those last 8 games".  You're smarter than that

[Low Positive]

1 minute ago, HappyDays said:

 

Philly goes into this weird funk every year, it's unexplainable. I guess the difference there is that I know the skill position talent is a lot better than the production they've gotten out of it, so I have more faith that they can turn it around as they did last year in the playoffs. I don't think the Bills have the personnel to suddenly become a dominant offense that can steamroll opponents.

The Bills killed a lot of teams last year with pretty much the same dudes. And in fact, Philly didn’t steamroll everyone. The only teams they destroyed in the regular season were the Bengals, Cowboys, and Giants. They really didn’t start rolling until the NFC Championship Game. Heck of a time to find your A game. 

[Kirby Jackson]

16 minutes ago, MasterStrategist said:

What snaps did he play?  Was he in the game for how many passing yards/points scored?

 

Legit questions - if you want to attribute success to him being on the roster.  

 

We also had Alec Anderson taking significant snaps last year ---- maybe it was him playing as 6th OL?  

 

Kidding aside, this isnt a "yeah but".  Its how much do you attribute success to Cooper?  

 

You do realize teams improve throughout the year, players improve --- lots of reasons to say our offense got better in those final 8 games, just because a player was added who played less than 50% of snaps and had marginal success, we cant say "oh yeah, Cooper is the only the difference between those last 8 games".  You're smarter than that

Again, who said “Cooper is the only difference?” I certainly didn’t say that.
 

Intuitively, I feel like Alec Anderson played some valuable snaps. However, I have never looked at the data to confirm or deny if that was the truth or just what I “feel.” I don’t put much stock into perception when there’s data that is fact. 
 

The games Cooper played weren’t all consecutive. The numbers that I provided were from the games he played not the last 8. Those aren’t interchangeable. If you choose to pretend that his presence didn’t have ANY impact (which is what it seems like you’re doing) please supply some data to support that. We have established that they threw way more and scored way more with him. If you’re saying that he wasn’t a factor, please share some data that made them better when he wasn’t dressed. I’ll be open minded but not going to buy into “that’s how I feel.” I’d like to see some data supporting that. 

[NoSaint]

4 hours ago, gobills404 said:

The run game got stifled, we turned the ball over 3 times, but “everybody eats” is the issue? I don’t get it.

we have the best car at the track

 

maybe the best driver in the history of racing 

 

and our lack of a WR1 is a resistor plate ensuring that we can’t pull away from the pack

there is a chance that Keon Coleman becoming a number 1 or not during this rookie contract will be the difference between multiple rings vs never reaching the big gene 

7 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

Again, who said “Cooper is the only difference?” I certainly didn’t say that.
 

Intuitively, I feel like Alec Anderson played some valuable snaps. However, I have never looked at the data to confirm or deny if that was the truth or just what I “feel.” I don’t put much stock into perception when there’s data that is fact. 
 

The games Cooper played weren’t all consecutive. The numbers that I provided were from the games he played not the last 8. Those aren’t interchangeable. If you choose to pretend that his presence didn’t have ANY impact (which is what it seems like you’re doing) please supply some data to support that. We have established that they threw way more and scored way more with him. If you’re saying that he wasn’t a factor, please share some data that made them better when he wasn’t dressed. I’ll be open minded but not going to buy into “that’s how I feel.” I’d like to see some data supporting that. 

If nothing else, I think opposing teams had to respect his nameplate and any given week could click

 

 also think it sent a message to the team about expectations 

Edited 15 hours ago by NoSaint

[Kirby Jackson]

6 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

 

If nothing else, I think opposing teams had to respect his nameplate and any given week could click

 

 also think it sent a message to the team about expectations 

For sure!  They kept safeties over the top. They spent time preparing for him, etc.. I’m by no means saying he was a dynamic player here. All that was said is that the passing game and scoring was much better with him than without? Why? Who knows but his presence almost certainly played a role. 

[gobills404]

9 minutes ago, NoSaint said:

we have the best car at the track

 

maybe the best driver in the history of racing 

 

and our lack of a WR1 is a resistor plate ensuring that we can’t pull away from the pack

there is a chance that Keon Coleman becoming a number 1 or not during this rookie contract will be the difference between multiple rings vs never reaching the big gene 

Maybe, but personally the thought “if only our passing game had been better” never crossed my mind after losing the AFCCG last year.

[NoSaint]

1 minute ago, gobills404 said:

Maybe, but personally the thought “if only our passing game had been better” never crossed my mind after losing the AFCCG last year.

Ignoring whether or not you thought of it

 

what do you think would happen if Keon Coleman suddenly played like a top ten WR that could punish teams deep?

 

no worthy is too small or legette or DK debate… simply Keon steps in and plays like an elite wr. 
 

does our run game improve?

does our defense look better with a lead?

Edited 15 hours ago by NoSaint

[Thurman#1]

21 hours ago, YodaMan79 said:

The whole “everybody eats” approach might sound like balance, but it’s really the football version of saying you’ve got two starting quarterbacks.  It's a diplomatic way of admitting you don’t have one true game-changer. I don’t want to hear it anymore.

 

 

No, it's not. But that is one way of missing most of the point.

 

And whether you want to hear it anymore probably means to me about what it means to the Bills.

 

 

11 hours ago, NoSaint said:

we have the best car at the track

 

maybe the best driver in the history of racing 

 

and our lack of a WR1 is a resistor plate ensuring that we can’t pull away from the pack

there is a chance that Keon Coleman becoming a number 1 or not during this rookie contract will be the difference between multiple rings vs never reaching the big gene 

 

 

No, it's not. That's nonsense.

 

We HAVE pulled away from the pack. We're 4-1, tied for the best record in the league. And we're third in scoring.

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Thurman#1

[Thurman#1]

15 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:

In the 8 games that Cooper played, the Bills threw for 264.4 yards per game and scored 35.5 PPG.

 

In the 8 games that Cooper did not play, the Bills threw for 203.6 yards per game and scored 28.1 PPG.

For those of you that don’t think that 7.4 PPG difference is significant, the Bills finished 2nd in the NFL at 30.6 PPG. If you subtracted 7.4 PPG and were at 23.2 PPG they would have finished 12th.

 

 

Fair enough. But correlation does not imply causation. 

 

I mean, you might say, "Hey, look at the final Pats game. The Bills only threw for 129 yards. And Amari didn't play. That's pretty clearly a massive fall-off without Amari." 

 

But then you wouldn't be left without much to say when someone replied, "Don't you think that Josh Allen playing one snap to keep his consecutive game streak alive, handing off and Trubisky playing the rest of the game might have had to do with even more of that dropoff than Amari not playing?" And that one game was responsible for more than a quarter of the shortfall between yards and points in games he played and games he didn't.

 

If Cooper was the causation rather than mostly just the correlation, it would have been pretty easy to tell. He only played 46% of the plays in the games he was playing. You could throw out all the games he didn't play in and look only at the games he actually played in. And there'd have been a major difference in those games in how the Bills performed depending whether he was riding pine or in the huddle.

 

Nobody has ever showed any stats showing anything like that. At least that I have seen. Have you seen anything like that? And it's not like this hasn't been pointed out before. People were looking to prove this. If there'd been a major difference, IMO it would have been trumpeted to the heavens.

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by Thurman#1

[Kirby Jackson]

16 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Fair enough. But correlation does not imply causation. 

 

I mean, you might say, "Hey, look at the final Pats game. The Bills only threw for 129 yards. And Amari didn't play. That's pretty clearly a massive fall-off without Amari." 

 

But then you wouldn't be left without much to say when someone replied, "Don't you think that Josh Allen playing one snap to keep his consecutive game streak alive, handing off and Trubisky playing the rest of the game might have had to do with even more of that dropoff than Amari not playing?" And that one game was responsible for more than a quarter of the shortfall between yards and points in games he played and games he didn't.

 

If Cooper was the causation rather than mostly just the correlation, it would have been pretty easy to tell. He only played 46% of the plays in the games he was playing. You could throw out all the games he didn't play in and look only at the games he actually played in. And there'd have been a major difference in those games in how the Bills performed depending whether he was riding pine or in the huddle.

 

Nobody has ever showed any stats showing anything like that. At least that I have seen. Have you seen anything like that? And it's not like this hasn't been pointed out before. People were looking to prove this. If there'd been a major difference, IMO it would have been trumpeted to the heavens.

 

 

While correlation does not imply causation, the sample size is large enough that his presence is almost certainly “A” cause (but not the only cause of course). It’s almost certainly not coincidental that their improved passing and scoring coincided with him being in the lineup. What amount should be attributed to him? I don’t know but it almost certainly isn’t zero. 
 

Sorry, I should have clarified. I threw that final Pats game out because they didn’t want to win or play starters. It’s the other 16 games

Edited 4 hours ago by Kirby Jackson

[Thurman#1]

2 minutes ago, Kirby Jackson said:

While correlation does not imply causation, the sample size is large enough that his presence is almost certainly “A” cause (but not the only cause of course). 
 

Sorry, I should have clarified. I threw that final Pats game out because they didn’t want to win or play starters. It’s the other 16 games

 

 

Thanks for clearing that up about the final Pats game.

 

"A cause"? Yeah, fair enough. No arguing that. But "a cause" means a non-zero effect. I think that is indeed very clear. But it could be 1% of the cause. It could also be more, of course. I'd argue it is indeed a bit more than 1%.

 

But that it were any kind of major cause that in the games he played, the Bills offense's production would have been a lot better in the plays when he was on the field and teams had to account for him than it was when he was on the bench and defense didn't have to worry.

 

And again, nobody's ever been able to show anything like that.

[JP51]

Everybody eats, Running back my committee, Rotational QB stuff... etc...  this means that it is our philosophy to not have premier player (s) and move our focus to using C to B players to get it done.... thats fine especially when you have the MVP at QB... (quite honestly if you look at KC I would not call any of their receivers elite.... nor pacheco... but rather C-B players to get it done...  Kelce was an A guy but see him more in the B category now...  they have superior game planning and coaching, I am not sure ours measures up to that...they also have a true deep threat in Worthy )

 

Brady seems like a well lets run it see what they do and adjust at halftime guy...  not a fan of that, but you cant argue with his results mostly.  Although It becomes a hard route to go especially once folks get a better understanding of your scheme and you lack an elite talent.  Understandably they were shell shocked by Diggs and his demands for the ball and were naturally relieved when they could throw to the open guy. But, you wanna go that route you better be ready to game plan. 

 

Your elite passing talent is Josh and he covers up a lot of flaws... Bottom line to me is that it can work... but it cannot remain stagnant, an elite talent is gonna blow stuff up no matter what... a system offense is as good as the system and when the system gets adjusted to well you have to adjust the system... 

 

Will Brady.. .I dunno, I hope so... Cook was on fire, they adjusted, Cook is no longer on fire,  will we adjust to that...  Bottom line is, the lack of a true deep threat/elite talent compresses the defense and makes things a lot harder... for all... Looks like the plan is Kincaid, what does that change to when they adjust to Kincaid...  because if Atlanta watched the Pats game they will... 

Edited 3 hours ago by JP51

[Orlando Buffalo]

We have an offense that averages 30 pts a game, two absolute game changers in Josh and Cook, and we spent our money on our OL so Josh is safe. Any major issues with the offense are crazy. We are the most efficient offense in the league and if our defense gets back to the 2021-2022 version we would be wiping teams out. Ioved watching Sugar Rush Josh when he existed but this current version is better for winning 

[BigPappy]

19 hours ago, zow2 said:

 

I do not buy the trap game angle,,, as they had their "trap game" scares when they were huge favorites over Miami and NO and both games were tied or barely ahead in the 4th Qtr.  

 

Like every recent season, I think the Bills fall victim to their regular season "greatness" and how Vegas and media anoint them as SB favorites.  The players since week 1 feel like no matter how iffy the game is going, they will pull it out at the end...because they are the Buffalo Bills.  Well guess what, when the opponent wants the game more than you? a comeback is not always going to happen.  McDermott does a nice job trying to keep the guys humble and hungry but it's human nature as a player to think your team is awesome and nothing bad will happen.  They forgot about attention to detail in the NE game, and how hard they need to outwork the opponent.  Simple as that.

 

 

A good with valid points as well. 

[SunDSolar]

54 minutes ago, JP51 said:

Everybody eats, Running back my committee, Rotational QB stuff... etc...  this means that it is our philosophy to not have premier player (s) and move our focus to using C to B players to get it done.... thats fine especially when you have the MVP at QB... (quite honestly if you look at KC I would not call any of their receivers elite.... nor pacheco... but rather C-B players to get it done...  Kelce was an A guy but see him more in the B category now...  they have superior game planning and coaching, I am not sure ours measures up to that...they also have a true deep threat in Worthy )

 

 

 

Why do people think Worthy is a deep threat?  He's fast yes but he doesn't run "deep" routes.  He more used as a McKenzie like gadget WR.  Obviously has potential to be a A+++ at that but he is not a deep threat and not showed that yet in his career

[PatsFanNH]

23 hours ago, YodaMan79 said:

The whole “everybody eats” approach might sound like balance, but it’s really the football version of saying you’ve got two starting quarterbacks.  It's a diplomatic way of admitting you don’t have one true game-changer. I don’t want to hear it anymore.

 

When the commentators talked about it on Sunday night like it was a good thing, I completely lost it. Either the organization is lying to itself, or they think we as a fan base are clueless. Consider this my therapeutic vent, a realization that the front office is failing this roster and its fans.  Like the Eagles, this team could easily be 3-2, 2-3. They just don't pass the eye test. 

 

On the bright side, no one team looks unbeatable this year. I’d say maybe 4–6 teams have a real shot to win it all.  So, why not the Bills!?!?

Everyone eats.. I always took to mean they spread the ball around which is a good thing. That means your QB is throwing to the open man not just 1 star WR all the time. Brady made a living doing that and by doing it that opens up the star players as well

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

13 hours ago, gobills404 said:

Maybe, but personally the thought “if only our passing game had been better” never crossed my mind after losing the AFCCG last year.

That chiefs jags game was a reminder of what the vision is for the bills for me and it was a nice reset lol.. the jags have talent at wr and the chiefs dbs were straight up mugging them all game with little to no calls all the same.  Jags got kinda fortunate they drew that late pi the way that game was going.  It was the same story when the bills had Diggs/beasley/brown…chiefs had little to no problem locking all those guys up when it mattered 

 

I think leaning hard towards the run game is the best way to neutralize a lot of those exotic blitzes/handsy dbs the chiefs are running 

[Generic_Bills_Fan]

7 minutes ago, PatsFanNH said:

Everyone eats.. I always took to mean they spread the ball around which is a good thing. That means your QB is throwing to the open man not just 1 star WR all the time. Brady made a living doing that and by doing it that opens up the star players as well

The fan vibes are that brady always had stacked WR rooms because of that short time with Randy moss where they ironically didn’t win a Super Bowl lol. Brady was playing a lot like Josh is right now style-wise with similar wr talent for a lot of his career.  His best wr was  usually a slot guy 

 

 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Generic_Bills_Fan

[JP51]

1 hour ago, SunDSolar said:

 

Why do people think Worthy is a deep threat?  He's fast yes but he doesn't run "deep" routes.  He more used as a McKenzie like gadget WR.  Obviously has potential to be a A+++ at that but he is not a deep threat and not showed that yet in his career

His speed makes your defense respect the threat of him going deep whether it is deep routes or RAC... we currently dont have that and that takes a concern away from opposing defenses...  bottom line you got a guy with a 4.2 40 your defense needs to account for that.  Thats all   

Edited 27 minutes ago by JP51