Coach Tuesday

Lol “random cutoff” - you are verging on unhinged here. You don’t understand what “statistically significant” means, you don’t understand what DVOA is measuring. Remember when you accused me of hiding several bad games because you couldn’t access the link because you don’t want to pay for the content, and then it turned out to only be one statistically insignificant performance? What’s “obvious” to all is your complete lack of understanding of the subject-matter, your moving goalposts and outright paranoia mixed with your bizarre condescension as if you’re some intellectual titan deigning to explain the universe to us apes… which couldn’t be farther from what is happening here. The Bills’ offense in 2020 had one of the best if not the best overall performances in franchise history, setting numerous records. Both on the aggregate and, with 2 possibly 2.5 or 3 exceptions, individually, did what they needed to do - meaning they performed at or, in most cases, far better than average - to beat the opponent and (as was the original point) affect a positive point differential. You are the only person - literally the only one, there is no one else - arguing otherwise. The argument I was responding to above was that “context doesn’t matter” which you’d think would have been the subject of your flat-earth “nonsense” campaign because of course context matters, of course you’d want to understand why point differential wasn’t higher, whether it reveals weaknesses or trends. So far all you’ve done is trotted out the absurd notion that the Bills’ 2020 offense was a mirage and could barely beat the Jets… something the stats and everyone else’s eyeballs knows is borderline insane.

Apparently it’s “nonsense.”

It was always in Jax.

I think that’s right, though some of it was poor game planning / coaching not to lose, which they improved after the Arizona debacle. Speaking of which, that game statistically was sub-optimal by the offense BUT the offense did what it had to do to win the game in a pressure situation (consistent with the aggregate numbers I posted yesterday) and the defense (specifically Addison) crapped the bed and lost the game.

Somewhat reminiscent of Lori's game week write-ups, which I miss.

"Not good" and "poor" are not the same as "statistically worse than average." If the offense is within 1% of what an average offense is supposed to do in the same situation, I put that in the category of "doing its job."

More like Star-crossed, amirite?

Every message board needs its “Angry Divorced Guy at the Memorial Day BBQ.”

Hilarious. To quote Samuel Jackson in Jackie Brown, “What happened to you man? Yo’ ass used to be beautiful.”

Lol there is ONE game, the first game against the Jets, where the offense had -0.7% DVOA. That’s it - one. And that means that for week one, the offense performed just a hair below how an average offense would perform against that defense in those offensive situations. To my mind the offense did its job in that game, it performed about as it was supposed to. Not better, not really worse. It’s not significant to me - if you think it is, feel free to revel in it. Yes I brought up DVOA. I cited the aggregate season number and you accused me of hiding the ball. I then dug up the per-game numbers and gave you credit for adding one more game to the list of bad offensive performances - and you again accused me of hiding the ball. I then revealed to you that there was one game (not several) where the offense registered between zero and negative one and explained why I didn’t count it. Now you’re telling me to go ask Josh Allen what he thinks. Your level of emotion/vitriol here is hilarious - show me on the doll where @BADOLBILZ hurt you.

Lol “weasel language.” I didn’t include under 1% because it’s not statistically significant. Dunno what you’re used to in your life but you keep accusing me of hiding the ball and I keep showing you the ball - therapy does wonders my friend.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/single-game-dvoa-by-team/2020/buf

Actually it's free and it took me about five seconds. There were three games last year with a negative offensive DVOA of more than -1%: KC, Tennessee and Arizona. Tennessee was worse than KC (-32.4% to -12.7%) so congratulations, you've added a second game to my list. Well done Thurman. Drilling down further, only one of those games - Tennessee - had a negative DVOA for passing offense; the other two games were dragged down by negative rushing offense DVOA. By contrast, there were six games last year with a negative overall defensive DVOA of more than -1%: NYJ (second game), Seattle, Chargers, 49ers, Pitt, NE, Miami (both second games). In all of them except the Jets game, both the pass defense and rush defense had high negative DVOA; in the Jets game it was the passing defense that let them down. There was also only one game (Rams) where the defensive DVOA was higher than +20%; by contrast, there were 8 games where the offensive DVOA was higher than +20%. So congrats, you've got me to amend my statement as follows: other than against KC AND TENNESEE and, in part, Arizona, the offense did its job last year and the defense was the reason for the tight points differential.

The reason I gave you the aggregate numbers is because that’s what I had handy in the FO Almanac I purchased. They provide the weekly numbers on the FO website. I don’t have time to go dig those up for you, but feel free to do that and we can continue the conversation.

Actually DVOA does speak to that, but I gave you the aggregate numbers, not the per-week numbers. You can go dig up the per-week DVOA if you'd like. By and large the offense did its job week in and week out last year which the weighted numbers bear out.

According to DVOA, which heavily weights opponent-based and situational adjustments - yes, the offense did its job last year.

Watt will play on Sunday and will make an impact.

Maybe just have a soft spot for your username.

If you truly believe point differential is "meaningless," your opinion is "worthless."

It's far from meaningless but you have to go beyond the numbers to understand what's going on. Did both the offensive and defensive performances vary or just one? (In the Bills' case, it was just defense). If they both varied, did the variance coincide, i.e., did the entire team play flat against weaker opponents? If so you're probably looking at a coaching/focus issue. If one unit varied, was it addressed in the offseason by player personnel/coaching/scheme changes? Etc. etc. There is a lot behind the "why" that absolutely matters.

You look at offensive and defensive DVOA, for one, which I believe exists on a per-quarter basis at Football Outsiders (but I’m not certain). EDIT: the FO Almanac, which I purchased and highly recommend, is illuminative. The Bills’ 2020 offensive DVOA in the first half of games ranked 3rd in the league; in the second half of games it ranked 9th. Red zone DVOA on offense ranked 9th. In “late and close” situations it ranked 5th. By contrast, the defensive DVOA in the first half ranked 12th and in the second half ranked 11th; red zone defensive DVOA ranked 11th, in “late and close” situations the defense ranked 6th. This tells me the offense mostly did it’s job, the defense let teams hang around until “late and close” situations and then tightened up. This is consistent with what we all saw with our own eyes last season and to me explains the relatives close point differential. Elite offense, average defense except in pressure situations it stepped up.

To be clear: the “context” here is the defense - the offense did its job every week except against KC, basically. So the issue was the defense letting the other team keep the game close. It’s not like the offense was laying goose eggs some weeks. Point differential can mean different things to different teams but in the Bills’ case, the defense needs to improve this year and not let teams hang around.

He definitely has games where he's just completely disengaged from the action on the field, and/or plays completely out of the gamplan. That said, (i) he's never really had to play in a game that mattered; and (ii) the gameplans have almost always been awful. This is really "put up or shut up" time for his legacy, he'll be playing in games that matter for a coach who can gameplan for the modern NFL. The jury is out, but I can totally see him having a monster year.

Not so much the headphones as the talent - Goff simply lacks the arm and leg talent to overcome the play call. Stafford is far more talented and mobile.