BackInDaDay

what teams do in particular 'down and distance' situations have been called 'tendencies' since introduced to the league by the Cowboys GM Gil Brandt back in the late 60's 4th down risk / reward calcs - like 2 point conversion calcs - can probably be downloaded from the internet.

that's the offensive genius i've come to love!

you da man! always enjoy your walking us through the prospects.

classic!

sorry.. i thought it might be obvious. Cutler. our next Bledsoe.

i'm thinking that you're definition of 'franchise QB' is a guy who has the intelligence to understand why the coaches want him to attack where he's attacking, the instincts to correctly process coverages and pressures in a split second, and the physical ability to deliver the ball accurately and on time. such a guy would make a welcome addition - no doubt. i like Whaley. i think he's resourceful - but that's a tough 'ask' for 2015. i'm looking forward to your continuing analysis of both FA and collegiate O linemen who can help a flawed QB execute a flawed offense.

Orton's announcement smooths the way for the FO to rationalize the pursuit of the only quarterback whose name evokes the buzz Brandon will need to sell Hackett 3.0 to the fan base - and it ain't Tebow.

try reading the beginning of this topic, boy wonder it's human nature to internalize fragments of external information, to form opinions that are less based in fact, but in emotion. simply put, to tell oneself what you want to hear. but you can vet my opinions by reading some 2013 articles and interviews regarding Marrone's hire - ones you may have missed during all the excitement of gaining a promising new coach. you'll find information about what he brings, and what he plans. i doubt you'll do that though, because it's also human nature to dismiss information that threatens personal beliefs - but they're out there. included in some of that information, is an interesting ESPN article regarding the wisdom of college coaches bringing their collegiate staffs to the NFL. it examines the pros and cons of a few coaches - including Marrone. the author makes a point of Marrone bringing Hackett across in a 'lateral move' from the Cuse to 'develop' him as an NFL OC. he points out that this appointment has led to the additional hires of a QB coach and an Sr Offensive Assitant to support him. i agree with the author on this, which is why Marrone's 'tough guy' stance about 'not developing players in games' rings hollow to me. how many games did we lose because he allowed his protege to learn on the job?

maybe Marrone should reach out Billick - a guy hired to improve the Ravens offense, but who rode Marvin Lewis's coat-tails to a championship.

Yes.. Marrone is well thought of by those who choose to ignore the reasons why he was hired. That's fine, if it gives you the 'warm and fuzzies', but the 2015 offensive cupboard is still bare.

Wrong.. I pay no attention to pencil necked geeks who can't form their own opinion. Sports media has adopted the 'anything for attention' philosophy of social media.

schefter = media parrot = one who propogates rumor and speculation as fact, to support current popular opinion

mr suh can expect a hefty fine, and a possible suspension in 2015 for attempting to disable one of the league's poster boys. maybe 4 or 6 games.. he's definately into double secret probation territory

it's been awhile since we've had a team strong enough, and balanced enough, to make the playoffs. maybe some of the fans here would have made better choices.. just sayin'

i understand your frustration when measuring the Jets' 'failed' QB to ours. the kid really lit up the Dolphins big time, and good for him! there might be a lot more fight in Geno then the NY fans and the media parrots give him credit for. the thing is, EJ's situation is different. at this point, he needs to win the job in camp. he was given an opportunity to lead, and failed. the actual reasons why he failed are irrelevant now. he has to take the job back by convincing this questionable offensive coaching staff that he's their best shot at executing their flawed system, and getting wins. there's no other way. it's not his fault, that after being drafted to lead Marrone's innovative, up-tempo offense as a strong-armed read-option threat - the bottom fell out on such systems in the NFL - and that now he needs to perfect the quick timed pocket passing skills needed for this alternative offense the coaches are struggling through. the odds are against him making that transition, but all Bills fans should hope he takes it back, and keeps it, in 2015. someone has to rescue this offense, and it's certainly not going to be Orton.

i agree - just from the opinions expressed in this forum.. perception is reality, so he'd be wise to strike before reality sours the perception.

Marrone might want to get a verbal commitment from the FO regarding an escalation in the offensive talent level before committing to his return in 2015.. at the moment, whatever accomplishments the Bills have achieved in 2014 are being viewed as his doing by a majority of the media and fans. regardless if some of us view his tenure thus far as a failure. if he's not delusional, he might reflect on the public image he currently enjoys, and measure it against the facts (with apologies to Dwight Shrute) .. fact - he was hired as an innovative offensive mind, but had to ride the coat-tails of a championship caliber defense to win one more game than he lost. fact - he was tasked with developing Fitz's replacement, but will enter his third season without a productive QB fact - he and his offensive protege have designed a predictable, ineffective offense fact - he cannot build a consistently productive, cohesive unit from the affordable offensive talent the scouts and GM have made available to him if he's realistic, he might conclude that the adoration bestowed on a man who has failed so miserably, is not sustainable - and run to his most lucrative offer before next year's media parrots learn new lines, and a hopeful fan base feels, once again, betrayed

[quote n ame=Big C' timestamp='1419809070' post='3392558] With an efficient offense - just efficient - we would be have 11-12 wins. Marrone is not the reason we missed the playoffs. One of the above statements is ridiculous. Marrone was hired because of his experience coordinating the NFL Saints quick hitting offense for Sean Payton, and his ability to translate much of these same concepts into a productive, uptempo offense at Syracuse. So you guess which one. Also, if Marrone's reported comments (by Wilcott during today's game) about how games are not for developing players is true, then he should hold himself and his OC to that same standard. Why some of you are ok with him developing an OC at the expense of wins, makes me wonder..

i haven't seen any aspect of the offense improve under this staff. not the kid QB not the vet QB not the young receivers not the RBs not the O line nothing. nada. zilch. if the offensive system cannot execute at an adequate level with the talent we have, then the front office has to make a decision.. bring in enough new 'parts' that will allow the current coaches to improve the production of the 'whole' bring in new offensive coaches who can make the 'whole' greater than the 'sum of it's parts'. someone better bang on the door of the 'analytics' office and get their take on where the problem lies before choosing one, or the other.

Ok.. so add a stud RB to what they need. Of course, I'm being facetious, but you're making my point. Their failure to field an effective offensive unit is perceived by many as the result of what they didn't have. I expect more from coaches - at any level - so I have to ask, why couldn't they succeed with what they had? sometimes the same answer satisfies both questions.. but I don't think that's the case, here. Because i don't believe our below average production is due to below average talent. Sure.. we have weak links.. and its the coaches responsibility to approach each game knowing how the opponent will try to leverage those weaknesses, in order to keep their exposure to a minimum. was putting the entire season on Orton's arm the correct choice for each team we faced? or was it the only choice these coaches could make because they remain stubbornly committed to an offensive system that cannot succeed as is? so yeah.. if these coaches had superior talent at QB, O-line, and RB - their offense would put up points. yep.. it's the player's fault. see what I'm talkin about?

personally, i believe its a player who needs very little coaching. this staff has shown little in improving anyone's game.. in fact, the opposite seems true. perhaps this is at the heart of the FO's frustration with the coaches.. they believe they're handing them a roster that should compete at a higher level, yet one third of the team hasn't responded. I don't think there's a team in the league that doesn't have weaknesses, but the better coaches work around them each week. the rest use a lack of talent as an excuse. would a stud QB and stud OGs help our offense? of course! but the unfortunate reality is - anything less, won't.

big joe and phantom 309

i didn't mean that Hackett should practice, if that's behind your answer - but that might be fun to see.. i meant that Hackett should be playing a constant game of 'what if', fueled by conversations with his defensive coaches about how they'd defend particular formations in various situations - followed by practicing the executiuon of plays against what he might encounter. it's the fear of missing some small aspect of preparation that keeps the best coaches awake at night, but Nate's constant smile reminds me of that old saying ~ ignorance is bliss

its a 'rub' play coming out of the bunch.. different ways to run it, but looks like the #2 (Woods) came off the line too quick to pick the DB who came up to the line defend the #3 (Hogan). if that DB were off the line a yard or two, Woods could have run a quick Z route (slant across his face, and then angle out) - but since the DB was too close, Woods should have delayed coming off, or even hitched back as if receiving a bubble screen. not a bad call, but Wood wasn't ready to execute it as defended. somebody really has to get Hackett's nose out of the play book and get him onto the practice field. sloppy execution continues to bite his O in the ass.

not sure if that's a cover 1 - looks kinda soft, like a cover 3 - but i agree that they had no worries about us going vertical on them - they were playing 10 men within 10 yards of the los most of the game. i'm also not sure about Watkins being his secondary receiver there. the play seems to be designed to force that safety to choose to give help to the sideline or defend the post. that's Orton's read. if the wideout gets past the corner - the safety's screwed - but it looks like the inability of that outside receiver to get up field relieved him of having to make that choice. still, i wonder why Orton didn't hit the post - or the drag. by the looks of things, he was probably just 3 seconds into this, with enough protection to pump fake that safety away from the post - instead of trying to throw the WR open. anyway.. that's looks like a well designed play, where the receivers were running solid routes at good depths, and the line was holding it's own - enough for, what looks like Freddie, to run his checkdown route. this one's on Orton. unfortunately, in the last two years there are just as many pics of receivers running their men into each other.. for instance - where that post is run too shallow and the drag is run too deep. little things like that, which Hackett and his receiver coaches have never cleaned up enough to be a precision passing game edit - looking at that receiver hooked up on the outside.. rom his positon, it looks like he may have been the slot man running a chair route - up.out,up - after crossing a wideout running the post.. if that's the case, it's a lot to ask that slot receiver to fight through good CB technique to even threaten the Safety.. oh..well.. have to see it from the get go. edit 2 - actually, that would be the same position a defender would have smothering a hook and go.. which makes more sense i'm turning this into a Mike McCarthy flash card drill