Shaw66
-
Posts
9,251 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Shaw66
-
-
8 minutes ago, Billzgobowlin said:
I think you really have to chalk this game up to anamoly. Nothing looked like it has all season, penalties, tackling, turnover battle. Now with the weather getting colder let's see if the Bills understand how to use it to their advantage.
Anomaly, yes, but I think there's more to it than that. Maybe Hughes's complaint was correct, and they just had a lot of trouble preparing on a short week. Whatever, a lot of things were uncharacteristic.
But I also think the Bills' talent on the offensive and defensive lines is below average and susceptible to getting pushed around. We haven't seen that exploited until the Jets game, and I think we will see more of it. It makes sense that one guy or another might not be mentally prepared, but for both lines to get manhandled like that suggests that talent has something to do with it.
-
28 minutes ago, JÂy RÛßeÒ said:
At the time, the wins over Denver, Atlanta, Oakland, and Tampa Bay looked like signature wins. But those teams are not living up to expectations this season - none is above .500 right now.
With 6 of our final 8 games against teams currently .500 or better are we about to get gut-punched back to reality?
I'm trying to trust the process and not compare to past Bills teams, but it's tough...
I agree. Halfway through I'm thinking the Bills are an average to slightly above average team. They play hard, they're well prepared, which allows them to compete every week. But you can say that about a lot of teams.
I'm thinking that the problem with the Bills is that they're a little short of talent, which results from two things: Players on board don't fit the schemes (the typical problem when you change coaches) (I think Preston Brown is one of those) and players McDermott and Beane unload who didn't have the attitude they wanted (Watkins, Dareus, maybe one or two more). McD and Beane undertand this - that's why they loaded up on picks for 2018, and traded one of those picks for Benjamin.
Bottom line, I'm not prepared to finish 8-8. I'm not predicting that, but if they go 8-8 I'm okay. I think next year's Bills will have 4 or 5 starters who fit the system better, and 100% of the team will be on board with the process. That's when I expect 10 wins or more. Ten this season would be a nice surprise.
-
Nine wins almost always means you're relying on tie-breakers. It also means only 4 or sometimes 5 teams win 10. It means a lot of teams have to go 8-8 and 7-9. It happens, but I think the history has been 9 wins isn't a very good way to make the playoffs or, more importantly, to win in the playoffs.
-
7 hours ago, BadLandsMeanie said:
Well, I am not expecting it it but "because I say so" would be agreeable to me..
You sir can prove much of anything you wish with stats. Or so says I. Also Tyrod just has a way with stats that don't match up with my eyeballs. My eyeballs arent what they used to be, but they could be right.
Go ahead with your math if you wish. But haven't you notice he is not consistent? Some games he can throw some he misses easy passes, and so on?
Agreeable to you! That's great!
Stats then eyeballs. Four games with a passer rating over 100, six games over 90, two below 80. One might argue that's inconsistent, I think it's what you get from most QBs. Rodgers was under 80 for three games last season. QBs have bad statisctical games from time to time because (1) they have bad days and/or (2) their teams get outplayed, outplanned, outschemed. I think it's unrealistic to expect that your QB is over 90 in passer rating every game. Matt Ryan was under 80 only once last season, but he was the player of the year. He was under 80 five times in 2015. Brady was under 80 once in 12 games last season, three times in 16 games in 2015. So Taylor over 90 in 6 of 8 and under 80 in 2 of 8 isn't dramatically more inconsistent than the very best in the league.
Eyeballs: He had one game this season that I saw where he missed a lot of throws. I didn't see Cincy, and he might have had that problem then, too; I don't know. But in the other games I've been struck by how consistent, how accurate he's been on his throws. My eyeballs would have agreed with you last season, but not this season.
I was hoping that Taylor would take a step forward this season, and it looks to me like he has. Let's see what the second half brings.
-
3 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:
I think anyone who is hoping for or expecting a good stat line from KB is likely going to be disappointed. Its not easy for a WR with no history in an offense or with the QB to come in and have a connection instantly. Sure its possible, but just not likely because NFL passing is so highly dependent on timing.
That being said, I do think KB could make a big impact still by just being on the field along with Clay back to now have several people the D has to really account for. I could also see him make a splash with a couple of key catches to move the chains or even for a TD. One of our weakest areas has been the redzone, so having KB down there to either draw coverage from others, open the run lanes back up for McCoy, or be a big target for TT will be impactful even if it doesn't always show up on the stat sheet.
I think it's easier than you might think when it's a guy like Benjamin. You're not necessarily throwing to Benjamin as he makes his cut.
For example, end zone fade routes. It doesn't take a lot of time for the QB and a big receiver to refine this route. Line up as the left end, split out, get a release of the line, and when you cross the goal line, look for the ball up. QB watches the release of the line, determines that there's no double coverage, delivers the ball. Will they do that better after a season of practice? Sure. Can they do it well enough to have it in the game plan on Sunday? Sure.
I do agree that his biggest effect on the game will be as someone who is drawing the attention of the defense. However, for that work, the Bills need to throw it to him some. The Saints won't play the entire game focused on Benjamin if he isn't catching a few balls.
I say four catches for 48 yards, maybe a score.
-
3 minutes ago, grb said:
(1) Taylor's average time to throw is under three seconds - a bit better than Russell Wilson or Deshaun Watson, 7/100 of a second worse than Jared Goff. No doubt they can't process the field in under five seconds too......
(2) You'd think if Taylor really was as wide-eyed & befuddled playing as his detractors are so eager to believe (to an unseemly degree, eager), he wouldn't be sitting at eleventh by the NFL passer rating - with swiss cheese for an offensive line, a running attack which is nonexistent every other game, and receiving targets cobbled together from scrap heap retreads. What quarterback does better with less? Which leads us to ........
(3) Those darn yipsters. One thing those dang fopdoodles always bring-up is Taylor's performance in the 15 games where both Watkins and Woods played - the only time his three years starting where he had close to an NFL-grade pair of receivers : 63.6% comp. 8.25 YPA. 27 TD passes. 6 INTs
(4) Speaking of the Bad Timing Award : How 'bout peddling this - he earns a right to pout in the corner versus showing leadership to overcome those adversities - right after a game where Taylor was one of the few Bills who showed-up as a professional, played the entire game, with heart & drive (while half-ass was the more typical effort), and got brutally hammered as a result.
Not wanting to get involved in another Taylor thread, at least not today, I've been ignoring this thread. Came on just now to take a look.
Saw Old Time's post and just shook my head. Then I saw this. Beautifully done.
I'm not a big believable in the eyeball test, but I have to say that in the past few weeks Taylor has LOOKED to me like a real NFL QB. Comfortable and in command in the pocket, delivering the ball on target with the right touch, throwing balls away.
My only concern has been the sacks. Particularly against the Jets, the sacks looked not to be primarily his fault. He had nowhere to go and often no time to unload it. But I'd like to know what the coaches are telling him about those plays. Did they see something different?
-
17 hours ago, ExWNYer said:
Using a Chromebook and just click the reload button in my browser bar.
Question, Scott...any idea why my post count carried over correctly and continued after a couple of posts today but then just randomly dropped by over 1,100 (from 4,102 to 2,993)?
I do this, too. Easy enough.
-
11 hours ago, BadLandsMeanie said:
I'm back! One thing I didn't have clear in my head til now Shaw.
I think Tyrod is hot and cold. The way Fergie was. Don't do the stats please I bet his stats look just wonderfully steady.
Just remember down the road that I say hes inconsistent please. You can point it out to me that I was wrong in a year or two if you like!
I won't remember, because I can't remember anything these days.
But I would suggest to you that although stats aren't the be all and end all, to say you're concerned about Taylor's consistency but don't cite stats is to leave "consistency" un measurable. How are we supposed to have a discussion about consistency if not with stats? Am I supposed to be convinced simply because you think he's inconsistent? What does that mean?
-
1 minute ago, Happy Gilmore said:
Which ever coach dictates the offensive philosophy, he apparently cannot (or will not) make an adjustment during the game. We really should have tried to open up the run with quick passes in the first quarter (not give up on running at this point), and should have gone quick pass first in the third quarter when the game started to get away from us. Hopefully the Jets debacle was a rookie HC learning experience, and adjustments/flexibility can be done at points other than halftime.
Not advocating a gunslinging approach, but a very conservative approach tends not to win over the long haul without an '85 Bears or '00 Ravens defense; which we do not have at this point.
I agree. I'm hoping Benjamin will help them adjust to what you're talking about.
-
40 minutes ago, Happy Gilmore said:
But we still kept trying to run it against a five man defensive front. Is trying to force the run McDermott's philosophy or Dennison's? I would guess the latter since he makes the offensive game plan and calls the plays.
Tony Romo pointed out in the first quarter, I believe, that the way to counteract the stacked defensive front was quick passes. We did not do that; instead we kept trying to force the run which wasted a lot of time and effort.
Really like these write-ups, Shaw. Thanks for doing these.
Well, we don't know which coach is responsible. Early in the season McDermott said things that suggested to me that they weren't going to go away from what they want to do until they had to. That's the way the Bills seem to play.
I think he's very conservative. All season long they've stuck to the run if they were within 10 points. If it were Dennison and McDermott wanted more passing, McDermott would tell him to pass more. So I don't think it's Dennison.
-
1 hour ago, Comebackkid said:
true..but minus the injury possibility, passing the ball was still where we were most effictient. both in yards and tds
I agree. I wasn't arguing. No reason not to pass. But even passing might not have helped because the sacks were killing drives. Still, there was no hope running so it made sense to try something else.
That isn't McDermotts philosophy.
-
57 minutes ago, Comebackkid said:
nice work..notice one of those games was buffalo? I just look at it like if your qb is throwing for 75% and your running back is lucky to get past the line of scrimmage then throw, and throw a lot until it stops working.
Hard to argue with that, except the qb was getting sacked a lot.
-
6 minutes ago, Dr. K said:
I just watched the game on game replay, and though they made numerous errors and tackled badly and the play calling was often suspect and in general they looked bad especially in the second half . . .
- I thought Tyrod played a good game, especially considering the pressure he was under
- Zay Jones looked very good
- I am not so down on the team as I was having seen only the hightlights/lowlights.
I think they will bounce back from this game and play much better. Whether this will mean many more wins this season is an open question.
The Jets was an uncharacteristic game for the 2017 Bills. They haven't been outplayed before, and this game looked like they weren't ready mentally.
I have faith in McDermott that he will get them back on track. However, my faith has been misplaced before. It may be that all we saw last month was a hot streak and Thursday night was closer to what we'll see going forward. I don't know. We'll see.
-
Mobile is much nicer, I think. And desktop too. Great changes.
-
1 hour ago, Maine-iac said:
All the debate about the sacks. Credit to the Jets with a good pass rush plan. They sold out coverage for pass rush. All that said I still say that with no fumbles and minus a few penalties, we throw for well over 300 yards and the score is much much different.
Right
And Zay doesn't get tripped there may have been a second quarter touchdown.
Likenyou, I just don't see Taylor's performance contributing much at all to the loss. The lines got beat all night and that's why they lost.
-
26 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:
Sanders has averaged about 140 targets the prior 3 years with Denver and hitting Denver for a 10mill cap hit this year and 11mill next. Sanders has 25 catches this year, do you see a problem? Matthews is on pace for like 60 here in Buffalo. With that, there really is no reason to give him a "Woods" type contract. There is no reason to pay any high tier WR here in Buffalo if we will not throw them the friggin ball.
I will agree with you then as I don't want to turn this into a QB thread.
This is interesting. I think in the second half of the season we will see more throwing and if so I will disagree with you. If the offense opens up successfully they'll keep Matthews AND Benjamin.
-
1 hour ago, JohnC said:
There shouldn't be much fretting about the cap situation because there is now cap space, and next year with the added high picks there should be a number of cheap draftees who make the roster. What is just as important as the actual cap is the distribution of the cap throughout the roster. Allowing Gilmore to leave, dealing Watkins and trading Dareus are not just player transactions but also cap transactions that create better balance in that area.
What seems apparent to me is that this new regime is more strategic in handling the cap than Whaley was. The former GMo seemed to act in a more case by case basis without less consideration for the longer term ramifications.
I agree with this. I don't think the point is that it's 21 or a projected 52. The u re in good shape. Getting through 2016 1nd 17 has been the cap problem and they're done with that.
I also agree about the balance. I think particularly that these guys don't want to be spending their money outside the hashmarks. That's why Gilmore and Watkins are gone. Dareus is gone because he didn't fit.
-
14 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:
I don't view Preston Brown as a priority and would like to see us upgrade the position with a high end draft pick
I agree. I think they will replace Brown.
-
1
-
-
16 hours ago, Kirby Jackson said:
I’ve seen reports that they can have as much as $52M.
Spotrac says $21 million, 14th highest in the league.
-
9 hours ago, QCity said:
Halfway through the 4th quarter we had 7 points on the board. By my count there were about 5 three-and-outs. He looked like he was filming an instructional video on How To Get Sacked. Sorry, but the quarterback is certainly complicit in that mess. The blocking up front was terrible but TT wasn't doing them any favors. They brought 5 all night and he didn't have an answer.
You may be correct. From my seat it was difficult to know for sure whether Taylor could have avoided many sacks. It didn't look like it because he was in trouble almost immediately.
In any case it looked like the best he could have done was throw the ball away. That might have helped but wouldn't have changed the outcome. He wasn't likely to have gotten positive outcomes out of those plays.
-
1 hour ago, BadLandsMeanie said:
NIce post as per your usual Shaw. Thanks.
About this part:
"At the risk of starting a firestorm, what I really liked in the Jets game was Tyrod Taylor. Well see what the second half of the season, but Im pretty much sold on him."
What do you mean by sold? He's the future? I figure that is your meaning.
For me, I have never once seen him in one of those games where both sides are airing it out. You remember the ones where team are coming out with four wide and just going at it. I have never seen him march the offense like that, repeatedly, for a half or whole game.
Granted Tyrod does a lot of things well. But until he can throw well, until he can orchestrate and succeeded in a consistent aerial attack, I won't be sold on him. And I haven't seen him do it one time so far.
Would you give 2 first round draft picks for a solid franchise QB? And would you give 2 first round draft picks for Tyrod?
I'm sold on him meaning I would plan on him being my starter for the next five years. Meaning, I wouldn't trade up to replace him with a gilt-edged rookie. Meaning, if a QB I really really liked turned up late in the first round on in the second, I'd probably take him.
Taylor looks much better to me this year than last year. I think he's playing like a top 15 quarterback. As much as I'd like to have a top 5 quarterback, the chances of getting one are slim.
I don't buy your measure - he has to air it out for 400 yards in a head to head battle like Wilson and DeShaun Watson had a couple weeks ago. That can't be the measure of your QB, because it's too arbitrary. To have one of those duels you have to be on a team with good to great deep receiving threats, like Houston has. Your team's run game has to have failed., so you're throwing 45 times.
I don't mean I don't want one of those guys. It would be great.
I look at it differently. I think it's a sucker bet to keep looking for the Hall of Fame QB. If you have to look for a good quarterback, and when you find one you have to figure out how to win with him. What's a good QB? I think it's a guy who's regularly in or around the top 10 QBs in the league. When you have one of those, he's the guy you ride, trying to build a winner around him.
I've been saying since he finished his first season in Buffalo that Taylor COULD be the guy. He did an awful lot right that first year; the only thing he didn't do was pile up yards, because his team didn't pass. The last two games he's looked improved to me, and that's what makes me think he's worth riding. The last two games he's been finding open receivers, open enough, and delivering catchable balls. Against Tampa he was conservative and threw a few balls out of bounds. Against New York there was little of that. He looked like a top-10 guy on the TDs to both Jones and Thompson. His throw up the sideline to Holmes was beautiful. He was consistently making throws that I admire when I see Brady and Brees and Rodgers make. He just looks good.
I think he's looked better in the past couple of weeks because he's playing in a well-designed offense and he's starting to get comfortable in it. And I think it's likely to get better now that he has Benjamin to throw to. I like speed guys, but I also like the big guys, and the Bills have gone from Watkins and Woods - not tiny, but not big guys - to Matthews and Benjamin, with Clay coming back too. I'm expecting to be very happy with the second half of Tyrod's season.
I said it a few weeks ago. Tyrod's contract is going to renegotiated in the off-season, and he's going to be five years, $100 million, minimum. With five picks in the first three rounds, I'm expecting the Bills to draft at least two offensive linemen.
-
1
-
-
7 minutes ago, SDS said:
I went to bed at 6:15am. Slept an hour or so, but I napped prior to when I started at 10:15pm last night. However, time for me to shower and get dinner with the wife. I'll be offline for a few hours.
Use the force.
Mobile version looks great. Thanks for your work.
-
1 hour ago, HappyDays said:
Just for fun I wanted to see how many games there are since 2000 where a team had 63 or less rushing yards, and their opponent had 194 or more rushing yards, and that team won. I used Pro Football Reference’s game finder.
10 games where the lower rushing total won:
197 games where they lost:
You simply cannot win games when your opponent’s rush yards outnumber yours by such a wide margin.
That's interesting. Not surprising.
But the team is built to run. And McD sticks to his plan until he's forced out of it. Down 10 with 18 minutes yo go he still wants to run. That's what he does.
I'm curious to see what he does now that he has what looks like a quality receiving corps.
-
I don't understand why we treat Alexander as a 3 down LB. He needs to be rotated in and out, I much prefer Milano to be in on passing downs and let Alexander come in to rush the passer in situational downs. Makes no sense.
Alexander IS in and out a lot. I'm not sure on what downs, but he rotates out a lot.
I agree that Milano looks good and might help, but I wouldn't take Humber off the field. I think he played very well last night. I'd rotate MIlano for Alexander.
But I don't understand, and I think most others don't either, how the linebacker rotation is supposed to work. There's a reason they have the guys on the field that they have.
One other thing: I think McDermott had veteran linebackers in Carolina. I think he values experience, which may be why we're seeing a lot of Alexander and Humber.
THE ROCKPILE REVIEW - Good Gets Bad, Bad Gets Good
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted
Personally, I think that's an overdone concept. I don't think his height is much of a disadvantage.
If, and I think it's a big IF, he knows where his receivers are going and who should be open, he should be able to slide to find a sight line to the receiver or spot he's interested in. I still can't argue with people who say he doesn't make those decisions fast enough. I can't argue because I just don't know if he's slow or not.
The reason I question whether he's slow is that when he's completing 65-75% of his passes, he's being as efficient as the other good QBs in the league. If he really was so slow at scanning the field and making decision, he'd be nearer 50%. And that argument goes to the height issue, too. If he can't see, how come he's completing all those passes? How many passes a game is he missing because he can't see? Two? Three? I doubt it's five.
What about the sacks? Most of the sacks Thursday were on the d-line. How many could he have avoided by throwing it away or completing a pass if he were four inches taller? One? Two?
And the most important question, for the long term, is if you have a QB who's doing all the things right that he's doing, are you going to burn a bunch of draft picks on a rookie who's taller, who doesn't run as well and may never learn to be a quality starter?
People have their list of flaws for Taylor: Height, slow decision maker, lousy footwork, doesn't scan the field, probably a few others. But when you look at the CAREER passer rating list, the leaders in order are Rodgers, Wilson, Brady, Romo, Young, Brees, Manning, Cousins, Rivers, Warner, Roethlisberger, Ryan. If Taylor had enough attempts, he'd be next on that list. I just have to keep asking, myself and everyone else, if he's passing that well, how real, or how important, can those flaws be?