Is it the receivers or Brady

[Mikie2times]

Bills are averaging 33.5 PPG in wins and 15.6 PPG in losses. This offense just isn't multiple enough to win outside of heavy TE sets. When the running game isn't dominant we look like a bottom tier offense.   

[Scott7975]

I’m gonna go with both, with the caveat that this is also the offense McD wants to run and why he was so at odds with Daboll. 
 

even ***** receiver can get 500-600 yards on a season with a mid QB. So unless you think Josh Allen is one of the worst QBs in the league, and every receiver we have is about as good as a high schooler, then scheme has to take some blame. 

[Maine-iac]

1 minute ago, Mikie2times said:

Bills are averaging 33.5 PPG in wins and 15.6 PPG in losses. This offense just isn't multiple enough to win outside of heavy TE sets. When the running game isn't dominant we look like a bottom tier offense.   

Or ......... oddly enough ........ when we turn the ball over a lot we don't score as many points.  4 of Allens 5 picks are in losses and I haven't even looked up fumbles.

[CoudyBills]

2 hours ago, jkeerie said:

Brady.  These receivers have been productive playing for other teams.  Production disappears when they play in his schemes. It's like beyond blocking, just run around and get open.

Where they slotted in on those other teams matters.  A productive 3 on another team doesn't look so hot in Buffalo where nobody dictates coverage.  

[Mikie2times]

Just now, Maine-iac said:

Or ......... oddly enough ........ when we turn the ball over a lot we don't score as many points.  4 of Allens 5 picks are in losses and I haven't even looked up fumbles.

Or........oddly enough....... when we aren't efficient in moving the ball we are more likely to turn the ball over?

[SoCal Deek]

Can somebody please tell me why, if we truly have receivers who can’t separate, does brilliant OC design an offense that relies on those receivers beating people one on one? It’s pathetic play design considering the tools we have.
 

Brady needs to be fired! 

Edited 4 hours ago by SoCal Deek

[Maine-iac]

Just now, Mikie2times said:

Or........oddly enough....... when we aren't efficient in moving the ball we are more likely to turn the ball over?

2 of our turnovers were in the red zone and the 3rd would have been a first down just outside of FG range.  We were moving the ball.  We just turned it over too much.

[The Jokeman]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

Can somebody please tell me why, if we truly have receivers who can’t separate, does brilliant OC design an offense that relies on those receivers beating people one on one? It’s pathetic play design considering the tools we have.
 

Brady needs to be fired! 

And replaced with? 

[HappyDays]

6 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

So are you saying Allen couldn't have made the throw?

 

To Shavers? No. Pause it when Allen gets to the top of his drop. Shavers has just gotten to the 5 yard line, he has not even made his first move yet. As it is Allen tried hanging in there an extra half second against cover 0 to give Shavers time to try and get open, and that extra half second meant the pass was all arm since he couldn't step into it. Best case scenario here would have been the ball sailing out the back of the endzone incomplete. Obviously that's a better outcome than what actually happened but that's where the conversation has gotten - after Allen dragged the team kicking and screaming into a goal to go situation, does he take the bad option or the worse option?

 

Too many people on here or on Twitter want to focus in on the individual process or result of a single play here and there, because it helps them ignore that the offensive structure is fundamentally broken. It's so much easier to point to one play and say "Allen needs to play better" than it is to accept that the people in charge have made fatal mistakes and there are no solutions coming.

[Da webster guy]

2 hours ago, JMM said:

Call me old school, or just plain old. 😌 But for the LIFE of me, I simply CANNOT BELIEVE  that this team for two straight years doesn't attempt deep passes PURPOSELY,  not off a Josh scramble, at least 2-3 times a game. I know Josh doesn't throw a great deep ball. I DONT CARE. I know we don't have burners. I DON'T CARE.  You attempt the bomb. You can get a catch, you can get a PI. Yes it can be incomplete,  or a INT. I DON'T CARE. Because it reflects AGRESSIVENESS. It FORCES the D to at least respect the deep third. Teams are DARING us to go deep, and we say ah that's ok, here's a bubble screen. Now Josh was asked about this today, and he paused and said " I have to give guys chances", so perhaps some of it is on him as well.  But it HAS TO CHANGE. NOW.

i agree all except for the part where you say we don't have burners.   Elijah Moore and Curtis Samuel are elite speed guys   sub 4.4     

Also Miami played single high safety today which we don't normally see.   They took away more underneath stuff and dared Josh to throw long but he never did.   He's gonna develop a blindspot to the long ball pretty soon if he hasn't already.

[HappyDays]

16 minutes ago, EmotionallyUnstable said:

And waiting four seconds to throw all the way across the field was the better option?

 

Like I said in my last post - the conversation has devolved to should Allen take the bad option or the worse option? The fact that we're asking that question at all should be where the conversation starts.

[FloridaSnow]

3 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

2 of our turnovers were in the red zone and the 3rd would have been a first down just outside of FG range.  We were moving the ball.  We just turned it over too much.

That’s true. We may just be overthinking this as fans.

[SoCal Deek]

3 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

And replaced with? 

An OC who understands his freaking roster! 

[Maine-iac]

2 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

To Shavers? No. Pause it when Allen gets to the top of his drop. Shavers has just gotten to the 5 yard line, he has not even made his first move yet. As it is Allen tried hanging in there an extra half second against cover 0 to give Shavers time to try and get open, and that extra half second meant the pass was all arm since he couldn't step into it. Best case scenario here would have been the ball sailing out the back of the endzone incomplete. Obviously that's a better outcome than what actually happened but that's where the conversation has gotten - after Allen dragged the team kicking and screaming into a goal to go situation, does he take the bad option or the worse option?

 

Too many people on here or on Twitter want to focus in on the individual process or result of a single play here and there, because it helps them ignore that the offensive structure is fundamentally broken. It's so much easier to point to one play and say "Allen needs to play better" than it is to accept that the people in charge have made fatal mistakes and there are no solutions coming.

Except that fundamental system that's broken scores 30 points a game.  Then when it doesn't everyone says it's broken but it's also the same game where they have a handful of turnovers and dropped passes.  I get it we don't throw bombs to WR's and that makes a number of people on here nuts but if I'm Brady I'm doing the best I can with what I've got.  I'm not sure anyone else is doing any better with this group.  

[EmotionallyUnstable]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

Allen needs to play better" than it is to accept that the people in charge have made fatal mistakes and there are no solutions coming.

Both things can be true 

[The Jokeman]

1 minute ago, SoCal Deek said:

An OC who understands his freaking roster! 

Give me a name not a hypothetical.

[Mikie2times]

4 minutes ago, Maine-iac said:

2 of our turnovers were in the red zone and the 3rd would have been a first down just outside of FG range.  We were moving the ball.  We just turned it over too much.

So it's a coincidence Allen has 3 red zone INT's, one in each game, in the three losses? We were pressing. It increases turnovers. You're trying to blame a symptom, I'm blaming the disease.  

[Maine-iac]

2 minutes ago, FloridaSnow said:

That’s true. We may just be overthinking this as fans.

People aren't wrong when they complain about our wideouts.  I'm also not going to argue that Brady game plans to the TE's and running game but A: he's pretty successful with it and B what the hell else would he do with this roster?

[HappyDays]

6 minutes ago, Mikie2times said:

Or........oddly enough....... when we aren't efficient in moving the ball we are more likely to turn the ball over?

 

We're cobbling together 12 play drives and the predictable criticism from certain people is that we turn the ball over too frequently. Last year's offensive output may have been a net negative for the long term outlook of the team. It convinced the people in charge and by proxy the fanbase that that historically mistake-free efficiency should be the expected norm every year.

[SoCal Deek]

2 minutes ago, The Jokeman said:

Give me a name not a hypothetical.

I’ll do it. You can even help me. 👍