Fairchild and the Quick Pass..Does This Mean

[Mark VI]

I watched the Rams O and may passes were low risk quick hitters, which set up the occasional bomb downfield. It also set up some good running plays, since the opposition was looking at the past first.

 

Ever since the Gilbride O was figured out halfway through 2002, the Bills have been facing stacked fronts they rarely could beat. I saw a glimmer of hope against Miami on the Road last season with Losman hitting Evans...but Meatheads superior coaching allowed Miami to rally and win.

 

I still can't believe we signed Price but catching the short pass and turning it upfield was his game in 2002. Reed and Parrish seem much the same. This sets up the bomb to Evans, much like the Rams with Holt. Can we get something out of the TE ?

 

McGahee and the RB's may not have to hestitate and dance around this season, if we come out throwing first and pull the Safeties/LB's off the line.

 

I know. Postive thoughts aren't allowed here.

[Rubes]

I watched the Rams O and may passes were low risk quick hitters, which set up the occasional bomb downfield. It also set up some good running plays, since the opposition was looking at the past first.

 

Ever since the Gilbride O was figured out halfway through 2002, the Bills have been facing stacked fronts they rarely could beat. I saw a glimmer of hope against Miami on the Road last season with Losman hitting Evans...but Meatheads superior coaching allowed Miami to rally and win. 

 

I still can't believe we signed Price but catching the short pass and turning it upfield was his game in 2002. Reed and Parrish seem much the same. This sets up the bomb to Evans, much like the Rams with Holt. Can we get something out of the TE ?

 

  McGahee and the RB's may not have to hestitate and dance around this season, if we come out throwing first and pull the Safeties/LB's off the line. 

 

I know. Postive thoughts aren't allowed here. 

667294[/snapback]

 

 

What TE?

 

It's an interesting concept, and it would probably work in a system where the QB was an intelligent, quick thinker who could pick the right open receiver on the play. I wonder if Losman is really up to the task. I think he throws a nice long ball (Miami, KC), but his quick decision-making is still up in the air, and I think defenses can still take advantage of that.

 

Like Tags said, I think our success hinges more on the right guy at the QB position. A good O-line couldn't hurt, though.

[Guest BackInDaDay]

I think we'll see a lot of 3-WR/1-RB formations to widen things. As far as I'm concerned our best offensive threat at TE is still Euhus (if Everett can stay on the field he may change my mind, and I'm not familiar with the other guys). He's a good athlete who could split to create a Trips formation; flex to create a Wing; or stay put as a traditional TE. Whoever the TE is, he and the slot receiver will have to get seperation inside - quickly.

 

Formation and movement will be the key in creating quick-strike opportunities in the passing game, and getting hats on guys to the inside to free up our outside run game. McGahee's not the quickest RB in the league, but he's quicker than most OLBs and too strong for most CBs. Getting him outside is critical.

 

We were defended from the outside/in last season. This took away McGahee's bounces around end, and forced our young QB to complete his short to medium passes between the hashes where windows open and close in an instant. He either threw into coverage to the short/intermediate patterns or fired it to the deep. Holcomb did a better job hitting those same routes, but for whatever reason (arm strength or nerve) he'd dump the ball off after a quick glance at the deep route.

 

We have to make enough plays, both inside and outside, to settle the D into 'react' mode.

 

We did a good job last season on our first possesions in a game. Formations, alone, may have caught our opponents off-guard, keeping them from executing their immediate gameplans of collapsing our flanks. After a series or two, D personnel was moved and/or reassigned to take away our point of attack and get their gameplan back on track. After the D reacted, we did little in response.

 

Our coaches were confined by our QBs limitations. We were too easily defended because our QBs could not make plays. Our offensive death-spiral began there each game. Our inability to attack the middle of the field allowed the D to defend our best threats - outside. We have to draw them back in to open things up.

 

Oh, and having our D make some stops, keeping us from having to play from behind, wouldn't hurt.

[Kelly the Dog]

I think we'll see a lot of 3-WR/1-RB formations to widen things.  As far as I'm concerned our best offensive threat at TE is still Euhus (if Everett can stay on the field he may change my mind, and I'm not familiar with the other guys).  He's a good athlete who could split to create a Trips formation; flex to create a Wing; or stay put as a traditional TE.  Whoever the TE is, he and the slot receiver will have to get seperation inside - quickly.

 

Formation and movement will be the key in creating quick-strike opportunities in the passing game, and getting hats on guys to the inside to free up our outside run game.  McGahee's not the quickest RB in the league, but he's quicker than most OLBs and too strong for most CBs.  Getting him outside is critical. 

 

We were defended from the outside/in last season.  This took away McGahee's bounces around end, and forced our young QB to complete his short to medium passes between the hashes where windows open and close in an instant.  He either threw into coverage to the short/intermediate patterns or fired it to the deep.  Holcomb did a better job hitting those same routes, but for whatever reason (arm strength or nerve) he'd dump the ball off after a quick glance at the deep route.

 

We have to make enough plays, both inside and outside, to settle the D into 'react' mode. 

 

We did a good job last season on our first possesions in a game.  Formations, alone, may have caught our opponents off-guard, keeping them from executing their immediate gameplans of collapsing our flanks.  After a series or two, D personnel was moved and/or reassigned to take away our point of attack and get their gameplan back on track.  After the D reacted, we did little in response. 

 

Our coaches were confined by our QBs limitations. We were too easily defended because our QBs could not make plays. Our offensive death-spiral began there each game.  Our inability to attack the middle of the field allowed the D to defend our best threats - outside.  We have to draw them back in to open things up.

 

Oh, and having our D make some stops, keeping us from having to play from behind, wouldn't hurt.

667552[/snapback]

I don't think they paid Royal all that money to be second string (unless something bizarre happens and Vernon Davis falls to us). Which means they will either play two TEs if Everett is any good, or only use Everett (or Euhus) in passing downs and certain packages. And I really doubt we will use Euhus in regular formations unless he really comes on strong. I do, however, think we will see a lot of open formations and one back.

[Orton's Arm]

It's an interesting concept, and it would probably work in a system where the QB was an intelligent, quick thinker who could pick the right open receiver on the play. I wonder if Losman is really up to the task. I think he throws a nice long ball (Miami, KC), but his quick decision-making is still up in the air, and I think defenses can still take advantage of that.

 

Like Tags said, I think our success hinges more on the right guy at the QB position. A good O-line couldn't hurt, though.

I agree with you about Losman's limitations. But I don't expect these limitations to come into play unless both Nall and Holcomb are hurt.

[Pyrite Gal]

I watched the Rams O and may passes were low risk quick hitters, which set up the occasional bomb downfield. It also set up some good running plays, since the opposition was looking at the past first.

 

Ever since the Gilbride O was figured out halfway through 2002, the Bills have been facing stacked fronts they rarely could beat. I saw a glimmer of hope against Miami on the Road last season with Losman hitting Evans...but Meatheads superior coaching allowed Miami to rally and win. 

 

I still can't believe we signed Price but catching the short pass and turning it upfield was his game in 2002. Reed and Parrish seem much the same. This sets up the bomb to Evans, much like the Rams with Holt. Can we get something out of the TE ?

 

  McGahee and the RB's may not have to hestitate and dance around this season, if we come out throwing first and pull the Safeties/LB's off the line. 

 

I know. Postive thoughts aren't allowed here. 

667294[/snapback]

 

I actually am quite excited with the signing of PP. I know he cannot be reasonably expected to be a #1 after his failure with this role in AT.

 

In fact, I think since speed is his game he is actually on the backside of his career even if he recovers his past form. He MIGHT be a #2 WR talent for us as he successfully played that role in the past but only might.

 

However, I am pretty confident that at least he can play 3rd WR in 3 WR sets as a poster below expects we will use alot.

 

It is simply scary to think of the speed we will put on the speed with Evans/Parrish/Reed in a 3 WR set. Particularly if Evans coninues on the development track he produced in his fist two years and commands a double team then either Parrish or Price gets the dime DB one on one and should be able to eat this back up to a back up for lunch.

 

I actually do not expect to see Reed fill this same role. In college he got the big gains which brought him the Billetnikoff trophy as the best WR in college, but rather than scary speed this was all RAC with his former RB abilities. Perhaps he can be the possession receiver which none of these speed freaks are.

 

Aiken strikes me as more of a reliable ST guy and has never shown WR production as a fly WR or a possession WR that should scare anybody. I have him as the 5th WR on this team.

 

Davis is a wildcard and there is talk that he might develop into the #2 that compliments Evans (I doubt this but it is possible).

 

Barrin injury I think Fast Freddie is goner as a Bill.

[Spiderweb]

I don't think they paid Royal all that money to be second string (unless something bizarre happens and Vernon Davis falls to us). Which means they will either play two TEs if Everett is any good, or only use Everett (or Euhus) in passing downs and certain packages. And I really doubt we will use Euhus in regular formations unless he really comes on strong. I do, however, think we will see a lot of open formations and one back.

667557[/snapback]

 

I liked the fact that Everett was up to about 260. Then he was hit with a groin injury. Hope this guy can contribute.

[mead107]

I agree with you about Losman's limitations.  But I don't expect these limitations to come into play unless both Nall and Holcomb are hurt. 

667590[/snapback]

dreaming ?

[MadBuffaloDisease]

I liked the fact that Everett was up to about 260. Then he was hit with a groin injury. Hope this guy can contribute.

I assume the 260# was mostly muscle, or at least the same percentage as before. I haven't heard either way and wouldn't like to learn it's mostly fat.

[Nanker]

dreaming ?

668101[/snapback]

Probably he's still dreaming if we had Bledsoe...

[Orton's Arm]

dreaming ?

668101[/snapback]

I guess I must be, if I think Losman's still going to be on the roster by the time Nall and Holcomb both get hurt!

[cantankerous]

Yep i'm hoping we run multiple WR sets to open it up for both the passing game and keeping the D honest to set up the run...it should be exciting next year with all these weapons we have. Let's hope it all pans out.

 

SpidersWeb...AWESOME rec room man! I want one of those BAD now!

[Astrobot]

I assume the 260# was mostly muscle, or at least the same percentage as before. I haven't heard either way and wouldn't like to learn it's mostly fat.

 

Regarding Everett: Go here and do a search for "Everett". This will give you a good view of him at his Pro Day a year ago. Note that he doesn't have much fat on himself, and alo note that he can't catch passes as well as the Davis combine video.

[bluv]

I do, however, think we will see a lot of open formations and one back.

667557[/snapback]

I hope so for I believe McGahee runs much better without a FB in his way as he is not a hit the hole, follow the FB through type of RB; I think running plays that the Colts use; those stretch runs off tackle that allow him to use his vision and have cutback options are better for him. That combined with the fact that we haven't had a receiving threat at FB since Centers or a pass catching TE, we have been forced to show our hand based on personell. I think that having a 3rd WR or even a double TE set on the field would be more productive. Really poor offensive coaching and gameplan has hurt us more the past 3 years than lack of talent or poor blocking as we have never had an offensive identity; hopefully Fairchild can change all that!

[Matt in KC]

I hope so for I believe McGahee runs much better without a FB in his way as he is not a hit the hole, follow the FB through type of RB; I think running plays that the Colts use; those stretch runs off tackle that allow him to use his vision and have cutback options are better for him. That combined with the fact that we haven't had a receiving threat at FB since Centers or a pass catching TE, we have been forced to show our hand based on personell. I think that having a 3rd WR or even a double TE set on the field would be more productive. Really poor offensive coaching and gameplan has hurt us more the past 3 years than lack of talent or poor blocking as we have never had an offensive identity; hopefully Fairchild can change all that!

668439[/snapback]

I definitely agree. Daimon Shelton was one of the biggest disappointments for me last year. He finished 2004 strong, and while displaying tough running on a few times last year, proved to be ineffective blocking for McGahee.

 

I thought several times we'd be in better shape just having a track star sprint down field to draw coverage. When Shelton hit the line, he either was let through ("Toro!") or was tripped up, becoming another bodt Willis had to avoid to gain yardage.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that Wilis is good at being patient and finding an opening. If our fullback actually created more space, I think he'd run behind a FB very well. Unless we get a major upgrade at this position, however, we're better off with another player on the field.

[bluv]

I definitely agree.  Daimon Shelton was one of the biggest disappointments for me last year.  He finished 2004 strong, and while displaying tough running on a few times last year, proved to be ineffective blocking for McGahee. 

 

I thought several times we'd be in better shape just having a track star sprint down field to draw coverage.  When Shelton hit the line, he either was let through ("Toro!") or was tripped up, becoming another bodt Willis had to avoid to gain yardage.

 

I guess what I'm saying is that Wilis is good at being patient and finding an opening.  If our fullback actually created more space, I think he'd run behind a FB very well.  Unless we get a major upgrade at this position, however, we're better off with another player on the field.

668485[/snapback]

I don't blame Shelton as much as McGahee's running style. Take Henry for instance; he would burst into the designed hole and follow the FB. Willis would glide to the hole and rarely 'hits' it up in there. So instead of trying to change his style why not find a gameplan that takes advantage of his strengths? And JP seemed to have better success when we spread teams out as well. Being that speed at WR is a strength why not take advantage of it? I'd just hate to be able to sit from home and call the plays based on personell like I have the past few seasons: when the FB is on the field 90% of the time it's a run; when the 3rd WR comes in we rarely run. Then combine that when they take Willis out on 3rd down, it is easy to figure out why we consistently rank as a bottom offensive club. We need an offensive identity that utilizes personell that can be productive in both passing and running to keep the D off balance vs non stop substition and overcoaching.