PBF81

You're preaching to the choir. But criticizing the one that conducts our drafts is frowned upon here. LOL In the playoffs it's been the problem. 13-Seconds comes to mind. For sure an offense that put up 36 regulation points wasn't the problem.

I would not disagree, particularly with that bolded part. I'll add that I have no idea why McD continues to get a pass for the offensive issues, essentially by virtue and implication that he's a "defensive minded coach." He needs to be a complete head coach or go do something else. I expressed elsewhere in the last 24 that it's nice that he's brought us out of the drought doldrums, but how long is he going to live on that reputation without delivering the next level. It's run its course. It's a rhetorical question, but he's the head coach, there ought to be some responsibility associated with the whole enchilada, not just half of it. The last time I checked, that was the responsibility of head coach.

My theory: Because they've never had three that are above-average starters ever since Lorax retired. Again, just a theory. But look at our roster for LBs from 2020 - 2022 and ask yourself which three would you start? That's why they run this goofy defense that no one else runs. I get that it's a passing league and we need to be able to stop the pass, but you cannot do that at the expense of the run. Agreed. And seriously, this "they only had two big plays, one for a TD and the other setting one up, otherwise they didn't do anything" thing, ... really? LOL

Firechans is right. I got into many an argument suggesting that Sherfield anyway wouldn't do much. He's on pace for 14 catches for a little over 100 yards and 0 TDs. There was more excitement for Harty, but again, he's right when he says that everyone considered it an upgrade. FWIW From where I sit, if you can clearly explain to everyone that's reading what the offense is trying to do with the talent that they have, I think everyone would be grateful if you'd share that.

I agree, Bills 41 Giants 9. ... oh wait ...

How 'bout them Cowboys!

Not possible with the "culture" we've created here. (extreme sarcasm intended)

Are you hedging on their behalf? To start, all I did was put up some factual info. I haven't opined in this thread and will try not to. I haven't interpreted anything in it. But to your point, they really haven't done much to bring in the type of talent that would be better than Davis, apart from sign Diggs, right? Or do you view the two 5th, three 6ths, and 7th picks that they used on WRs apart from Davis to be indicative that they were not satisfied with the situation? Whom they discussed bringing in here isn't really material. What is material is the situation that they have created, no? We talk about it here, but not one person here had anything to do with that, right. Are you saying that they haven't been satisfied? If not, why not do you think? What would the problem have been then in that case? Let's not forget, Beane's six seasons in and McD is seven seasons in, we're well past the "getting his own guys in here" thing. That ship sailed several seasons ago. What's here in port is their cargo. Right? Or do you view it differently? More relevantly I would probably ask which of the receivers on that list would you prefer here? How much do you think a WR like that would cost to bring in? And what difference would it make?

Isn't that the reasoning behind trading up to draft Kincaid?

I started a thread with this for the stats, so that they wouldn't get lost in the thread. Given all of the discussion re: Davis and whether or not he's a #2 WR, his limitations, etc., while discussing this with another poster I mentioned that I'd put together a listing of all of the current #2 WRs in the league as it stood after 6 weeks. Granted, given injuries etc. there may be a few oddities, and in some cases I had to determine which was the #2 going by depth charts and data. That's generally not a good thing for that team. I tried not to count the Slot WRs, but if they were unmistakeably the #2 I may have used it. If you want to find issues you will. I also didn't do a ton of research besides simply looking at each team's stats. I didn't count injured WRs. Also, in I believe two cases, the TE was the #1 WR, so the #2 WR was really the best WR on the team. KC and the Giants have question marks because none of their WRs stand out. KC's leading WR for example, after Kelce, is on pace for 694 Yards and 6 TDs. The Giants' leading WR is on pace for 669 Yards and 0 TDs. So none of those are really germane to the discussion when their best isn't even as good as our second and in KC's case having nothing to do with the QB. Feel free to include any of their WRs in the discussion however. The point of this is not to get everyone worked up on their position on Davis, rather to encourage discussion as to what the expectations for a #2 WR really are, which can vary with the team. I know we'd all love to have the modern equivalent of Rice, Moss, and Gonzalez in our WR/TE ranks, and Sanders or Payton in our backfield, and the HOGS of the Skins as our OL, but we also need to be realistic. I also don't want to take a position out-of-the-gate here. I do think that discussing coaching or Beane is fair game since it stands to reason that this is what they wanted, and they even stated that they like Gabe as a #2 during the offseason and strongly believed in him. So there would seem to be a strong relationship between the situation and McBeane. Anyway, here's the data, look it over and ask yourself the tough questions. I sorted it by the obvious Receiving Yards, and put Davis' rankings in each category at the top for purposes of comparison. I had to reduce the size of the spreadsheet to get it on. Hopefully it can be expanded.

They were a playoff team last season like we were a playoff team in 2017. Easy schedule, new coaches that had the advantage of the early part of the season with their newness of schemes, etc. Then a late season skid that went into the following season. In short, they benefitted from circumstances last season like we did. That's the only way a team gets in with a 9-7 or worse record. Let's also not forget that Cincy game with the pass from Dalton to Boyd to put us in. Of the five other 9-7 teams that didn't make the playoffs that season we were easily the worst. Same as last season, the only other team with a winning record in the NFC that didn't make the playoffs, was Detroit, which was arguably a better team than the Giants, especially at the end of the season. The Giants won only two of their last 8 games whereas Detroit started off 1-6 but finished 8-2. Daboll's been 4-11 since a hot start last season. His offenses are right where they've always been except when he had Allen on fire for two seasons, on or about DFL.

Who knows what's going on, but to suggest that coaching isn't primarily responsible or that McD should be insulated from that from a coaching perspective is irresponsible.

Six weeks into the season, here's my concern du jour; Regarding our offense is that last season our lowest scoring games were 10, 17, 19, and 20. After that we scored 23+ in every game. This season, only six games in, we've already all but matched our low scores: 14, 16, 20. The fact that our offense has sputtered like that up front is concerning as was 0 points through 3 Quarters yesterday. This week @ New England will provide more info. There isn't a gimme game on the schedule at this point given our play of the past two weeks. Agreed. Not sure what's going on. I also just looked at our aggregate numbers this season to last, with my belief that there's no reason for us to be wore in any offensive category from last season. Last season we had more passing TDs, 17 to 13, fewer INTs, 4 v. 6, more passing yards, more 1st-Downs, fewer rushing yards but a noticeably better YPC avg. per above, and more points by 3. Not quite sure what that means at this point other than that the coaches are underachieving with this crew.

5'8" @ 310 LOL

19 snaps, 25% 1 assisted tackle

The LOL was referring to the naked eye comment after another poster was shot down with data. IDK, I hadn't considered it, so let's look at the comps this season to last, as I write here, through six games. Should we consider only the RBs then? Let's run RBs and total, since so many runs last season were seemingly designed to run Allen. Here's the raw data. It appears that the RBs in general are carrying the laod more, but overall, the total rushing yards is not significantly better. The Yards-per-Carry is also down by a Yard-per-Carry by the RBs and by .3 YPC in total if we include Allen. So I suppose the answer depends upon what the criteria is. More rushing TDs by the RBs, then yes. More yards by the RBs, yes. Yards-per-Carry, either, no. More total rushing yards by the team, no, particularly given the diminished 1.0 YPC. But in a direct answer to your question, I would say no, and here's why. Last season our running game through the first six games was notably more consistent. Last season we had rushing totals in games 1-6 as 121, 101, 115, 125, 120, 125. Best to worst was 24 rushing yards. This season we've had rushing totals in games 1-6: 97, 183, 168, 104, 29, 128. Best to worst is 154. As for me, I'd rather have the consistency as it makes it easier to plan. The standard deviation of that second set is 6 times what it is for the first. But concerning me more about our offense is that last season our lowest scoring games were 10, 17, 19, and 20. After that we scored 23+ in every game. This season, only six games in, we've already all but matched our low scores: 14, 16, 20. Your thoughts? 2022

Maybe it was, but from what I saw I thought that the fight was naturally spawned. Dawkins and whomever it was got into a tussle in a seemingly normal manner and it escalated from there. Maybe it was contrived. I'll acquiesce, file under who cares. LOL You also ignore some things going the other way too. Like the Giants' decision-making at the end of both halves. They easily could have scored 14 more to your 6 more theory. Just sayin'. At the end of the day they had more total yards, more passing yards, more rushing yards, a comparable number of 1st-Downs, ran more plays, converted nearly twice as many 3rd-downs, despite having more penalties and penalty yards. Either way, they came into this game ranking either 31st or 32nd in offense, now they're 32nd, DFL. They haven't even averaged a dozen points-per-game, so holding them to 9 while watching them screw themselves out of one or possibly two TDs doesn't support notions that our D played well either. Also consider, we allowed them their second most 1st-Downs, second most passing and total yards, and most rushing yards that they've logged all season. Our OL seems to have been playing quite well prior to this week. Why the downturn, at home, in a game that was very important given last week, but against a defense and passing defense in particular that doesn't rank above average in any significant category and which ranks DFL in both sacks and QBHits, and fourth from the bottom in TFL. They have 5 sacks, 4 of which are by Thibideax. Not one other player has a full sack. LOL Either way, back to my original point, we're not a team that's good at adjusting to what the opponents are giving us. And again, we didn't enter this game looking prepared. My concern is that over the past several seasons we've come out of the gates swinging, as if the early part of our season decided whether or not we were going to make the playoffs, then leveled off, which appears to be what is occurring again, ... as we approach the gauntlet of our schedule. What's far more important is continuity over the course of a 17-game season now. At this point I'm seeing a 10-7 wild-card team. Also concerning is that Dorsey's had 22 games now to prove some competence in regularly adjusting, not calling boneheaded plays that even the national media is all over, and for ensuring that we get the most out of this offense. 0 points through 3 Qs simply doesn't cut it, the fact that it was against the Giants only pours lemon juice into the cut. It raises serious questions, very serious ones in fact since his peers have done quite a bit better generally speaking at the top levels where he is, in that amount of games, as to whether he's suited for this role. The only questions in my mind are who's really in charge offensively? It sounds like Dorsey, but does McD have his undeducated hand in it? To what extent does Allen impact things at the coaching level? We don't know. But the notion that Allen's the reason why Dorsey's here, and given Dorsey's blatant issues, that's a problem. I'm also critical of McD's role in it. Does he have one? If not, why not? He's gotten quite a bit of lattitude on the issues of the offense, unearned IMO, when he's the head coach. At what point is McD held accountable for Dorsey's inabilities or incompetencies? Dorsey is ultimately McD's choice for OC, no one else's. McD's gotten quite a bit of mileage out of having been the one to "bring the Bills back," but the standard needs to be raised now, and questions need to start being asked whether he's the one to take this team across the Jordan. And now with Allen's shoulder potentially injured. They need solutions now, while Allen's here, not after another five seasons trying to see whether McD is the one to take us there despite his miserable ability to coach come playoff time.

They beat the Jets, played them better than we did in both sides, and three of their losses are to teams that will all but assuredly make the playoffs. After yesterday's stinker, and last week's issue-laden game, I'm simply hoping that our first few games weren't on adrenaline. Either way, I'm not counting any of our games as even approaching gimme wins at this point.

LOL, that was worse to stick that last part in there. 😁 Well see what comes back.

Yes, again, way out of context with the original point to which I made the statement. I know what I commented on, thank you. 😎

And House Ballards, and Thurman Thomases, and Bruce Smith's, etc. Maybe then we could win a championship. 😉 😏 Davis gets paid less than both. LOL Sherfield's never done anything, not sure why anyone expected him to here.

Your the first post I've seen mention that. I was wondering whether anyone was going to notice much less mention it. Again, this is attributable to coaching. You take Diggs, then have him run routes that most of your other WRs are fully capable of running, and with better results of Diggs took some defenders downfield first. Another mind-boggling thing related to Dorsey.

I don't mind discussing in the original context, but this is an enormous tangent.

Fair At the same time, you can always adjust to assist yourself, that's hardly a forte of ours, ... attributable to coaching. Secondly, did the team seem prepared to play yesterday? It didn't to me, and many others, which again, would be attributable to coaching.

How were they and the others we had doing at the time that Beane signed Miller? Seriously, you didn't get the context?