Bleeding Bills Blue

Still odd that we fired roman (now considered a good offensive coordinator) in Tyrod's second season starting. That's probably the best offense he could even be in. In year 2, injuries totally killed the passing offense. However there were 3 really winnable games in 2016 (MIAx2 and seattle) that if the defense performed even a little bit better the team probably wins. Same goes for 2015 - i think they win against cincy/jax if they have tyrod not EJ. He was a terrible fit under dennison (as was the offensive line), and his stats reflected that. At the end of the day - when plays needed to be made in the 4th quarter, he typically wasn't delivering. You need that from your QB. So he's in that fitzpatrick level to me. Fitz's highs are much higher, but his lows are turnover frenzies which absolutely kill your chances of staying in a game. Tyrod is more of a safety net kinda QB. Probably an ideal backup at this point. Teaches a young QB to work hard, pushes him for his job, and if he plays in a pinch, he doesn't kill you with turnovers.

He hasn't been surrounded by talent. But I haven't seen him elevate others either. Gase may be a QB killer too. The offense is so vanilla and horizontal. They no longer have a deep threat, and the oline is still not good. If I'm the Jets though? Tank for Trevor - and trade Darnold if you're successful.

Right - i think there are variables in every sport. Being good at hitting righties is a good baseline, or being good at hitting first pitch fastballs etc. But when its coming from someone like scherzer thats a new variable. Same with hockey - a good corsi means you shoot more than you have shots against you. But that doesn't take into account if you're playing d-zone starts against the other teams top line. You should have a lower corsi when you play the mcdavid line, half the time you're not even really trying to score. I think it'll be a challenge because of donald. The WRs are varied enough that you could attack with brown and bease if ramsey does a good job shadowing diggs. I'm much more concerned about kupp and higbee.

Yep - I'm gonna roll with my Brett Favre/Steve Mcnair hybrid comparison

I watched like 1 wyoming game that year. He threw a few absolute lasers on hitches and out routes. NFL throws that he made look easy. The touch issues were definitely there from what i saw though, he never really learned to throw a deep ball without throwing it on a rope. Trajectory is huge in the NFL, it allows you to create space and windows that you can't see. He seems to be learning the value of that.

Yeah - Taron hasn't been very impressive so far this year either. He's there to tackle well on the underneath guys and they seem to be constantly leaking out for first downs.

It's tough. The comparisons in the last 20 years of drafted prospects are guys like Bortles, Kaepernick, Locker and gabbert. Maybe to a lesser extent Cutler or Stafford - big arms and lower completion percentages in college. His numbers from an accuracy perspective were worse than all of them - so naturally from a statistical mindset you're looking at a QB who has to massively improve just to hit the minimum baseline, and there aren't really a ton of examples of that happening. I think examples you can look at if you go back further (look at it a bit more like 5% improvement in 1995 is more significant than 5% today), might be Mcnair or Favre from an arm talent perspective. They were inaccurate in college (sub 60%) and showed improvement at the NFL level. I think you would've liked to see something more like Mcnairs 4th year (like 6000 yards and 50+ TDs) at Wyoming - but the talent surrounding him was not very good, and consider Mcnair was playing in D1-AA. Looking at Favre's college numbers, nothing there indicates a player who would at some point complete 68% of his passes in a year, or lead the NFL in TDs. I don't think FO is trying to find the next Favre when they look at these types of analysis. The trend indicates you are getting a player like the 4 above - and that trend would indicate failure. But in all honestly - Allen reminds me a bit of Favre/Mcnair with how he plays. There's the reckless confidence of a favre, buying time and scrambling like mcnair, rocket arms.

I'm curious to see if its a difference in playcalling, execution, or defensive adjustments

Yes. FO would look at it contextual to the down and distance, not try and decipher the coverages etc.

I don't like hate what they do for WRs and CBs. Taking into account winning and losing routes where the ball isn't thrown can show you some interesting things. But at the end of the day... If you're in cover 3... you play behind the WR as you have no safety help. You will probably give up some underneath stuff unless you have really good eye discipline and closing speed. And cover 3 can look like man, just like cover 4 can look like man. and cover 6 can look like man. just because you are in a zone doesn't mean you aren't like... covering someone. this isn't madden, you don't just fade into a space of grass.

It was a 45 yarder, but with net not particularly good.

https://www.pff.com/news/pro-how-pff-grades-quarterback-play They try to factor drops in - but the "difficulty and timing of the throw" piece is garbage. They basically don't count screens... which is stupid. We've run enough bad screens to know that there is something that makes them successful beyond it being an easy throw. They don't include how a good hard count can slow a pass rush. They don't factor how an audible or line adjustment can scheme a guy wide open. It's an easy throw so its worth less to them - despite good quarterbacking being the reason you had the time, or understanding of the defense. They try to value a QBs ability to buy time, but holding the ball is negative... despite no one being open... or a offensive lineman performing the assignment incorrectly. It's insanely subjective in the context of a football game. The QB is a leader of the unit, but a function of the offensive unit. There is so much context given to every play, primary reads to secondary reads, pre-snap to post snap adjustments. I actually appreciate what FO does though - it just contextualizes the stats. Not trying to re-invent the wheel.

Agree - Bojo was fine. 2 within the 20, 1 FC and 1 out of bounds. 1 was shorter, but that was before half so i think that was a high shorty to limit the potential of a return. One was a bit longer and had a bit of a return. There wasnt anything that was like, noticeably bad.

He has little subtle footwork that he uses too. The one caused an incompletion early where it looked like an overthrow, but the 2nd one i noticed was that deep ball where he created a ton of separation down the field. He also has insanely good hands.

Better pass pro, better playmaking in the passing game.

I mean it was about an hour of time between drives..

Any word on Phillips?

I think the issue with Chris kelsay wasn't that he was bad. It's just that buffalo couldn't like... find a way to get the guy to like 3rd in the rotation - where he should have been. Schoebel was a good pass rusher, and kelsay probably would've been fine as an early down rotation/depth guy. Instead they just kept extending him and assuming he would improve from the player that he was. A horrible symptom of the drought was the spinning the wheels around certain players. It's almost like they were trying to be wrong.

Would adding like 3-4 feet to the top of the upright do something to the structural integrity of them?

Other teams could send salary back in a deal though

Ugh - can't we just score TDs? He should've been tackled well short of the sticks there.

Rookie WRs are going to struggle against man almost every time. Getting off the line in press. The ones that don't are like the athletic freak types like Moss who make a living off the contested catches. Diggs does all of those things well right now, and knows what it takes to be a pro. In years 1-3 of this deal he should outperform everyone drafted.

The almost INT after the Brown miss is the big one for me. He was rolling and backpedaling to his right and threw it up into coverage. We missed the FG anyway, but plays like that take points off the board.

They covered him too... which allen almost seemed disappointed with. Though I'm glad they did, he was terrible throwing when rolling left.

I voted 2. Just because i feel like UDFA's really didn't get a chance to showcase this year for other teams. That's about it. Starters maybe play half of the first one if at all. I feel like i also missed the chance to see some of the drafted QBs. Herbert, Love, Eason, Fromm, Hurts etc.