Beck Water

-dunno if it's put on for the cameras/mic but like Hyde, talks to the ball pre-game -to Williams: "you earned it" -interested seeing how the players *thud* into each other pre-game to "wake you up" -"it's a mindset! put this game on us!" -"we hit, we strap, and we talk s***! let's go!"

I have a friend who is a Patriots fan (don't judge me. he can't help it, he was born and bred in NE and he pre-dates the Brady years). When the Pats were perennially winning, but losing in the playoffs or AFCCG - say, 2009 to 2013 - he told me you could not believe the fans and media. Sooo whiny and "Chicken Little"

Fair question, though it's kind of meaningless to answer in the abstract. I would say Knox targets need to decrease by 1-2 per game until/unless his wrist heals and he fixes the dropsies. Kincaid needs more looks. Other than that, what I think we're seeing is Josh extending plays waiting for Gabe or Diggs to uncover, and sometimes forcing the ball into them and missing resulting in 2nd and 10, 3rd and 10. I think it would help a lot if he would take the open option be that Shakir, Kincaid, Cook. I think that means 1-2 less targets a game for Diggs and Davis (lets say 2 for Diggs, and 1-2 for Davis), going to Cook, Kincaid and Shakir. I don't think that would change the receptions Diggs and Davis have very much because while those balls are counted as targets to them, these are often the balls that Josh is overthrowing or dirting. They had Oliver playing 1TDT a lot - something like 50%. As the 1TDT, he's not gonna be registering a lot of tackles.

I thought @HoofHearted made a persuasive case for, in the first half, there were guys besides Diggs who were open. There were a handful of execution errors (and/or uncalled penalties), but there were a significant number of plays - almost as many as there were completions - where Josh had a different choice available to him and didn't take it. I do think, and I may be wrong, that other than Diggs our current receivers struggle to get open vs. man., and also that Dorsey likes plays that incorporate routes that work against different coverages - which is great, except when the guy who should be available isn't. Now traditionally teams haven't manned us up too much, but that was partly because if they tried, Josh killed them. If that's changed with the loss of Brown, Beasley, Sanders etc - We Better Have a Plan, and that Plan is Scheme. It's not so much the snap counts that need to change, it's the utilization. Kincaid has only been on the field 50% of the snaps of recent games. Knox, 60-76%. If Knox is going to drop 16% of his damned targets, then he needs to be targeted less. Shakir had 16, 19, and 24 snaps the last 3 games. He had 1 target per game each game and 2 receptions/3 targets overall. The question is why? Is he consistently running the right route? Is he getting open at the right time in the progressions? If the answers are yes (and I think, if they were no, his playing time would drop instead of increase) then why isn't he getting targeted vs. a doubled or tripled Diggs? If the answer is "Josh doesn't trust him" as Wood implied, then Josh needs to Get Over It or if there's a reason for mistrust, it needs to be addressed. If the answer to the "getting open" is "no", then either he needs plays that scheme him open, or he needs to sit down and give some of his snaps to someone else. Similar thing with Sherfield and Harty. It's not that the usage has to change that dramatically, but Harty is getting 10-15 snaps per game and being targeted once or twice. As far as "do we want Dorsey racking his brain on how to get them more involved?" the answer IMO is "yes",because we need answers in the quick outlet passing game. If they're good at what they're being asked to do and they're getting open, why aren't they being targeted? If they're not good at what they're being asked to do, then either plays need to be changed, or they need to sit down and give way to someone who can get it done, and whom Josh will trust to get it done. And if that someone isn't in the roster, but he's available for trade somewhere in the league, Beane needs to get 'er done.

It's usually not the same people.

FWIW, Shakir has seen steadily increasing snaps through this season. From 10% game 1, up to 32% vs Jags and 39% vs. Giants. That could just mean Kincaid is out, or it could mean the coaches are seeing positive developments for him in practice. But, his targets are not changing (1 per game) Kincaid, after 80% game one, has been holding steady at 50%.

Actually, Von, you can tame a mustang. I hadn't seen the full clip after Josh lit into Okereke. Gotta love the speed with which O'Torrence got there and inserted himself between Josh and trouble.

Dang, Ed Oliver DNP. Two bits of positive news there!

THIS. McDermott made it work most of last season with Jackson, Benford, and Elam. He made it work after Thanksgiving in 2021 with Jackson and Wallace. If we're making a big trade, the apparent need is on offense. Either that, or someone needs to get some "trust juice", sprinkle it into Josh Allen's eyes while he naps, and make sure the first thing he sees when they open is Kincaid, Shakir, and Harty. Group hug so you can get Sherfield in there as well. Look, I Get the sentiment, but at this point, we've not just lost our best corner, we've lost our best LB and our best 1TDT. Yet the group that's struggling, is the offense. Where can one top player make a difference? On the group where you're down 3 key players but somehow holding your own? Or on the side of the ball that's been looking inept and out-of-sorts?

Darius Slayton, Wan'dale Robinson, and Parris Campbell. It's hard to catch stuff that's not thrown to ya. Oh, yeah, and Hodgins. I wanted the Bills to sign Parris Campbell in FA. In retrospect, I was wrong.

I guess I'm 'toting a bone' here, but you sounded pretty definitive on Williams already. "We know his floor" "Lifetime Special Teamer" etc sure sounded like career pronouncements. We'd obviously be better off and Williams would not be starting if Milano hadn't been injured, but I thought he shows massive improvement in his 2nd game vs. the Giants over getting thrown in vs. the Jags, which is promising - so I'm ready to wait and see. I think he'll probably make a couple mistakes a game, but that may be better, overall, than Klein who would know exactly what his assignment is at all times and exactly where he ought to be, but won't physically be able to get there. The main "Captain Obvious" takehome for me is that with all the injuries leading to playing lesser players at DT and starting young players or rookies, the offense better get its collective head out of its rear orifice, and quickly.

I think you're conflating Kincaid's potential, with how the Bills have used him so far. He was used downfield in college. But yes, that's exactly what needs to happen - when the #2 WR is apparently best used on deep, slow developing routes, resulting in Josh fighting to extend plays, taking hits behind the LOS, and throwing interceptions - taking away targets from the double-covered deep guy and feeding the short, quick underneath option is EXACTLY what you need to do - except you don't use him as the "checkdown" after all other targets are exhausted. The idea is to use him as a quick outlet when he has grass ahead of him and can make more yards. Cook, too. In case the math hasn't struck you, short passes to the guy who can double his yardage with YAC and get 7 yds per attempt, or to the backs who can do the same or double it, moves the chains and either generates 1Ds, or puts us in 3rd and short. Exactly. Take the short throws, move the chains, and when the defense says "damn! we're being nibbled to death, we got to change up our coverage and slow this down!", Gabe will be more open deep, take your shots.

Yes, Cover2 is commonly used to take away the deep throws and keep everything underneath. Yes, it has been effective against the Bills especially when the plays called try to push it deep, or when Josh tries to force it deep against good coverage of Diggs or Davis. But this isn't novel, and it won't be consistent, just as the defensive coverage the Bills used to slow Miami isn't going to be consistent. And it won't work if Dorsey and Josh pivot, and take what the defense offers them It reminds me of a podcast Brett Kollman (The Film Room) did after the Bills-Dolphins game 3 where he revealed the KEY to slowing Josh Allen - kind of ignoring that the Bills put up 497 yds of offense in a heat-stroke game that saw one of their OTs playing snaps on a torn ACL because there was no one else left. The Bills, of course, went on to be the #4 offense in the NFL and flame out in the Divisional round, either because they were emotionally drained and suffering 1 too many injuries, or because their HC and OC should be fired (your choice) You got to remember that these guys are now "in it" to generate clicks and views, and you don't do that by being even handed and meticulous in your X's and O's knowledge. That's why we get pieces from Kollman that...um....don't age as well as the single malt he touts, like "Mac Jones terrifies me". Preach! I love me some Sledge, and I wish Gilliam would get a little more airplay, but I believe you mean Morris (and Gilliam has good hands for a FB/TE, but Morris is a converted WR and has the routes and the hands to prove it) Bernard and Williams say "hi". I mean, I own my receipts, I did it too with Bernard.

Um.... (click to embiggen) It's notable that Shakir, Harty, Knox and Kincaid all have more YAC than YBC. Sherfield is 4 yds off an even split. Now a large part of that, of course, is how Diggs and Davis are used, but to say that Diggs "is the only WR really effective in that area" or to imply that's the reason we're reliant on him, is simply not correct.

You realize this is becoming a campaign - multiple threads, multiple posts beating the same drum? Most people can understand this part of my post is actually justifiable criticism of Josh, one that I've made several times where merited: If you can't take the time to process and understand that, what does that say? It says to me you're campaigning and crusading. Criticizing Josh is fine, having a mistaken opinion that calls a scored drop "95% on Josh" for not making a throw "a HS QB could make" is your right, but going on and on and on about it in double-digit posts now in 4 different threads while manufacturing a non-existent conspiracy/unwritten rule where it's supposedly off limits in this forum to criticize Josh (despite the fact that reasonable and reasoned critique of 17 is all over the forum) - that's getting to be a bit much. It seems that the zebras will give the benefit of the doubt to "oh their feet just got accidentally tangled" wherever possible. A trip pretty much has to be "I stuck my foot out in your path just as you got there".

Gonna try to put in his assessment of Josh's pick: This seems to me to be an example of where I question, not the play design per se, but the details of how the routes are being executed. It seems to me (and I could be way off) that if the idea is to target Knox, he ideally needs to run upfield a few more yards before he makes his cut. That would force 41 to backpedal and give Knox a bit more separation. It seems to me it would also get Murray and Knox more in sync. The whole idea of that route combination as I understand it is to put Okereke in confliction between covering Murray and covering Knox. Now partly, I think Okereke is playing on inside knowledge of Josh's tendencies - Daboll knows that Josh hates the checkdown and seldom takes it. But even if he weren't, it seems to me the routes aren't coordinated properly, and Okereke has no need to be worried about Murray at the point where Josh throws. Again, I'm going off what I see, and I could be mistaken. And the receivers could be coached to run shorter routes because they are quicker, so there's that.

https://buffalonews.com/sports/professional/nfl/bills/jim-kubiak-bills-gave-up-on-what-they-are-known-for-to-do-what-they/article_20169eda-6d43-11ee-834a-9b13caabb97c.html#tncms-source=login The good news is, we had a run game to turn to. Warning: while I like Kubiak and currently subscribe to TBN (reconsidering), when I went to read the article I got a stupid pop up window playing Nick Wrong. 🤮 TBN needs to lose that, or I'm gone. They used to have a trial available cheap....worth looking at IMO.

It is a little weird, but on the other hand teams aren't required to provide an injury report until today so why would he offer information he doesn't have to? A lot of players are seeking treatment on Monday and "Get Right Day" (Tues) and it can be hard to distinguish limiting injury from "just sore" until a couple days have gone by.

You do realize that people have answered that very point for you, more than once? What is your understanding of the explanation that has been offered? 'cuz I see no point in reiterating without at least understanding what has/hasn't gotten through Appeal denied. Distinction without a difference in this context

It's just sort of a peeve of mine about the analytics trend fueled by the popularity of Fantasy Football. People come up with all sorts of stats, and pronounce "this good, that bad" without looking carefully at whether it's positively and tightly correlated to meaningful sorts of success (scoring points, winning games). So yeah, I bet you're right, there are a couple of other factors that, if combined with this stat, would correlate neatly with success, but by itself, it doesn't look as though it means too much.

I'm on record as not being one of the "Davis is not a #2 WR" club. Different offenses have different styles of #2 WR and he fits one style. However, people who know more football than I do (and Davis record) point out that he is not a "safety valve" receiver. He is not the guy who is reliably always open against any coverage. He does seem to have a limited route tree. So I'm kind of curious, what leads you to say Davis needs more, not fewer, targets? I would agree that the offense would benefit by having Diggs target load re-distributed. But I think it needs to be re-distributed to guys who can reliably get open quickly and gain YAC. I would nominate Kincaid and Cook as key beneficiaries of re-distribution attempts, with honorable mention to Shakir (provided he proves he can catch when targeted more, Sherfield or Harty if he doesn't).

The PR sell has certainly been "maybe he was hampered by injury last year".

I know this isn't the point you're making (I take that point to be: people are looking at "Daboll as OC" with rose-colored, revisionist glasses when many of the same complaints were raised in real time). Valid point, IMO. But I find this chart puzzling. Being a simple little beck running downhill over the rocks, seems to me if running on 2nd and long is "shooting themselves in the foot", you would think that the teams who do it a lot are bad, and the teams who don't do it are good. But when we look at playoff standings, we see that the Titans (a few steps up from the bottom) and Bills (near the bottom) were high in the standings. Tampa and the Cowboys, who top the chart, were high in the standings, but the Panthers (#2 on the chart) sucked, and other teams near the top (Seattle, the Jets) were mediocre that year. So I'm kind of wondering if this "run on 2nd and long" is as overall detrimental to the whole point of offense (winning) as the tweet implies.

There's some good explanations here: https://weeklyspiral.com/2021/06/21/draw/ https://weeklyspiral.com/2021/05/10/duo-concept/ https://weeklyspiral.com/2021/06/07/inside-zone/ To my understanding (and I feel certain I shall be set right if I'm mistaken 😃), the distinction with a "draw play" is the whole set up of the play is designed to "draw" the defense into defending a pass play. It's sort of the reverse of play action (where the set up is to look like a run, but then pass). This is done by having the OLmen in a pass set for blocking, the QB take the snap and act as if it's a pass play (either from under center or shotgun), the RB scan as though he's gonna be pass blocking and oh yeah, take the handoff and run. It's not a necessary feature of a draw play to have a QB in shotgun - a draw can be run from under center - nor is it necessary to have the QB take the snap in shotgun and hand the ball off to a stationary RB. In fact, I think in a draw play the RB would usually move towards the QB and try to "sell" as though he's scanning in pass pro, although that usually wouldn't mean "building up steam" as in an undisguised run play. Anyway, a key difference identifying a draw (again to my understanding) is how the OL is setting up their blocks and what are their blocking assignments, which explains why to a lot of observers, the distinction between a draw play and other run plays is obscure. That's also what @HoofHearted and @GoBills808 and others are talking about when they bring up DUO, ISO, Inside zone, etc. - they're talking about the blocking sets and assignments It's part of the confusion of learning about run plays in football that there's terminology that applies to the back or backs (blast, counter, slant, pitch, reverse, off-tackle) and terminology that applies to the run blocking scheme, and then slang terms that apply to the combination of what the back does and what the blockers do. But all run plays from shotgun where the RB does not run towards the QB for a handoff are for sure, not draws.