Beerball Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 the playbook in 2008 was pretty devoid of a lot of standard stuff like screens, draws, slants, etc Maybe the playbook wasn't devoid of those plays. Could be the OC never called them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 Wide Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Sounds like Turks playbook was so thick and complex that they didn't have time to get to the Redzone chapter. It's all so clear now...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 If I am not mistaken I remember reading in Kelly's book that the Bills only had 6 basic running plays they used, one of which was the virtually unstoppable shotgun counter trey that Thomas used to run all the time... Football is about execution. If the offense executes properly, they are going to move the football regardless of what the defense is doing... Let's not forget that while the offense was good through most of 1992, once Kelly ruptured his bursur sac in the latter portion of that year and lost some of his arm strength the offense was never the same (losing Wolford didn't help either). In fact, from late 1992 onward through 1995, they were average. Kelly had an inspired season in 1995, but they weren't scary at all (the defense was, however). Thurman went from being a 4.7 ypc guy to a 3.8 ypc guy pretty quickly, and Kelly had TD/INT ratios that weren't particularly great in his last five seasons (23/19, 18/18, 22/17, 22/13, and 14/19). In 1996, the offense sucked, and the defense got them to the playoffs. Basically, once the team's talent level declined to "pretty good" as opposed to "great", their offense ran into problems against the better teams (e.g., Parcells in New England) who were able to handle the Bills' very simple offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transient Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Let's not forget that while the offense was good through most of 1992, once Kelly ruptured his bursur sac in the latter portion of that year and lost some of his arm strength the offense was never the same (losing Wolford didn't help either). In fact, from late 1992 onward through 1995, they were average. Kelly had an inspired season in 1995, but they weren't scary at all (the defense was, however). Thurman went from being a 4.7 ypc guy to a 3.8 ypc guy pretty quickly, and Kelly had TD/INT ratios that weren't particularly great in his last five seasons (23/19, 18/18, 22/17, 22/13, and 14/19). In 1996, the offense sucked, and the defense got them to the playoffs. Basically, once the team's talent level declined to "pretty good" as opposed to "great", their offense ran into problems against the better teams (e.g., Parcells in New England) who were able to handle the Bills' very simple offense. While Kelly's decline had something to do with it, the absence of Marchibroda was a BIG part of that downturn as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 While Kelly's decline had something to do with it, the absence of Marchibroda was a BIG part of that downturn as well. Not really. The gameplan was the same, essentially, but the players were worse. Fina was a big step down from Wolford, Ballard became slower by the year, and Lofton was horrible by 1992 (his last season with the Bills). McKeller, the lynchpin according to Kelly, was basically done after 1992. Then Richter retired after 1993. Plus Kelly wasn't the same physically, and Reed lost a half step after the early 95 injury. Thomas started looking older in 1993 as well. Those guys weren't replaced (Russell Copeland, Bucky Brooks, Lonnie Johnson, Fina, a bunch of mediocre linemen, etc. etc.) Typically, Bills fans blamed the coordinator because it was easy, but they forget that Kelly called the plays under both Marchibroda and Bresnahan. It was a talent issue, basically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 I don't think the two have anything to do with each other...play action is just something that happens inside any given pass play...complexity likely means receivers running ad having to know hundreds and hundreds of plays. The more plays they ran, the less practice they had on each play, likely the less good they be on any given play. Fewer plays mean more repetitions on the same play and more time to fine-tune any issues and get better. There are a few things here. Just because they were running hundreds of plays, doesn't mean the plays were any good. Why is it they spent the majority of their time running 2 yard pass patterns and other other short patterns as reported by Paul Hamilton? The plays usually resulted in players not being open, which likely is the result of poor play design. Good passing plays usually force the defense to make choices, and depending on what choices they make dictates who is going to be open on any given play. The Bills pass plays did not force the defense to do much other than cover the players running patterns. In essence, the plays don't do what they need to do. Jason Peters remarked that the Eagles offensive playbook is twice the size of the Bills. http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/...eters-interview Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5 Wide Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 Jason Peters remarked that the Eagles offensive playbook is twice the size of the Bills. http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/...eters-interview I'm really not sure I would trust anything that Peters says these days. The guy is as disgruntled as one person could ever be towards the Bills and seems to take every opportunity to trash them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 I'm really not sure I would trust anything that Peters says these days. The guy is as disgruntled as one person could ever be towards the Bills and seems to take every opportunity to trash them. Donavan Mcnabb and the Eagles offense have been doing it successfully for a long time, the longer you are together as a unit the more plays you develop and run successfully. We shortened the play book because we didn't even run all the plays we had properly much less adding more. The better you execute, the bigger the play book gets, if you don't execute, it makes senses to decrease the amount of plays you practice until you start executing more efficiently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lofton80 Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 I honestly don't think the Bills were doing anything too complicated on offense during Schonert's time here. Jauron is a big part of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dog14787 Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 I honestly don't think the Bills were doing anything too complicated on offense during Schonert's time here. Jauron is a big part of the problem. In ways I think Shonert got a bum rap and its very possible DJ's needling with the offense has been one of the biggest problems over the last three years. Shonert ran the offense all year last year and forcing a decrease in the formations we run out of from last year seems odd and in my opinion would completely hinder what an OC is trying to do. I agree, there was nothing complicated with our offense to begin with although there are folks on this board who knows the X's and O's of football way better than I do so maybe I'm wrong here. We did originate from a very complicated Mike martz system in Steve fairchilds original offense and maybe this is where some of the problems originated. If that's the case DJ could be correct in his assumption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 7, 2009 Share Posted September 7, 2009 In ways I think Shonert got a bum rap and its very possible DJ's needling with the offense has been one of the biggest problems over the last three years. Shonert ran the offense all year last year and forcing a decrease in the formations we run out of from last year seems odd and in my opinion would completely hinder what an OC is trying to do. I agree, there was nothing complicated with our offense to begin with although there are folks on this board who knows the X's and O's of football way better than I do so maybe I'm wrong here. We did originate from a very complicated Mike martz system in Steve fairchilds original offense and maybe this is where some of the problems originated. If that's the case DJ could be correct in his assumption. That's a good point, Dog. They started with Fairchild who was to install a version of the Martz offense and it was actually starting to take some shape toward the end of year 1. The Bills went 7-9 with JP Losman starting all 16 games and a pretty weak roster, in truth. Mike Martz is famous for having a huge playbook and creating new plays and installing new things day to day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts