Cash
-
Posts
2,658 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Cash
-
-
2 hours ago, HappyDays said:
I guess what I mean is that it's easier to hide a below average OL than it is to hide a below average group of weapons. As evidenced by the fact that below average OLs have made it to the Super Bowl in recent years, but below average groups of weapons have not.
I agree with this. But with that said, one of my takeaways from last year was that our line just wasn't good enough. There's a critical mass of bad OL play, where the QB is hurried on almost every throw. To have a chance at winning in the playoffs, any OL needs to stay above that critical mass, and we didn't last year. I remember at the end of the Bengals playoff loss, telling people that my #1 wish for the offseason was "just an above average line. Doesn't need to be great; I just want it to not suck again."
At the current state of the league, I'm a big believer in having a "good enough" line. Meaning good players on reasonable contracts, and any Great players are either on rookie deals, or maybe you've got 1 Great team captain who makes the big bucks. (If the latter, that guy should ideally also be the LT, so that everyone else on the line makes less money.) As great as Quinton Nelson is, I'm skeptical that the Colts can ever build a serious contender while allocating that kind of money to a guard.
My philosophy goes double for the Bills, who have an all-world QB who's also one of the most elusive QBs in history. Any 1 defender getting through the line is usually not a problem. If that defender is getting through 80% of the time, it's a problem for sure. But if it's more like 5-6 plays a game, I'll live with that all day. Because usually the results will be something like 1 sack, 2-3 throwaways, and several positive plays either running or passing.
-
15 hours ago, NoSaint said:
spoiler alert if you are still binge watching to catch up: Miller got hurt last season and still isn’t back for real
I'm aware, thanks. The point is that Miller is playing a certain % of snaps right now, and Houston isn’t going to get those snaps unless Miller gets a new injury (or is placed on the Commissioner’s Exempt List).-
1
-
-
As several posters have mentioned, Baltimore makes a ton of sense, since he used to play there. Didn't he also play for KC not too long ago? I could swear he was with them the year they lost to NE on Dee Ford's Offside penalty, and probably the year after as well.
If he wanted to sign with the Bills, I'd have no objection as long as he's got something left in the tank. I think the above 2 are way more likely though, unless maybe either Floyd or Miller got hurt.
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, TheWeatherMan said:
Dodson lead with the crown of his helmet…15 yard penalty all day long.
Agreed. I was mad when watching it live, but on re-watching the game last night, it was a clear helmet-to-helment hit, and would be called again >90% of the time. You could argue that it's unfortunate for Dodson, because Dak started his slide so late that he basically put his face in the path of Dodson's helmet. But it's the responsibility of the defender not to lower his helmet in the first place. Once he does, he's liable for the consequences of whatever it hits.
Speaking of hits, Prescott took a BEATING yesterday. Even outside of the 2 flags. All of our sacks were pretty hard (legal) hits, and the Dodson & Phillips ones were especially hard. Plus he took a couple more shots on scrambles and pressures. His body can't be feeling great yesterday or today.
-
2
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, GunnerBill said:
I will not be content. This thread is not about contentment. Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
Because they’re trolling -
1 hour ago, Einstein's Dog said:
Several responses to the bolded. First is, yes, I have issues of trust with G Davis, and I think an intelligent OC should too. G Davis mistakes have cost us dearly. Just because people do not think Davis is good does not mean we think there are better options on our team to take his place. So no, he would not be off the team entirely.
Davis criticism is nothing like Bernard criticism. People have seen Davis play for several years now.
Dorsey was in part fired because of Davis' gaffes. If we won the NYJ and Denver games I doubt a switch would have been made. Part of the reason for the resurgence of the offense was the lessening of the targets and dependency on Davis, and to increase the role of Kincaid and Shakir. I thought Brady knew that.
You assume what the Bills organization thinks of Davis. If the rumors were correct inquiries were made for both OBJ and DHop.
"Misunderstand?" I can't believe you would be that clueless to think the OC has no control over what plays are being called. Brady has some responsibility here and it doesn't reflect well. On top of that Brady is now part of the regime that took part in the disgraceful 20 seconds debacle.
It seems like you think “the play” was a throw to Davis, and that we should’ve called a play to someone else. That’s not how it works, man. The play will usually have 1st/2nd/3rd reads, but it’s the players on the field - both offense and defense - who ultimately decide where the ball goes, or even if the ball goes anywhere.
-
24 minutes ago, Straight Hucklebuck said:
I never understood the Harty and especially Sherfield hype.
Harty is 5’6” without Tyreek Hill wheels. Media was trying to hype him up all summer with his 2021 numbers.
And Sherfield is a career journeyman on a 1-year deal.
The Bills turned over the bottom 3 in the room (McKenzie, Crowder, Kumerow), but they’re only better because Shakir has stepped into the #3 role.
Harty: I watcha lot of Saints games, and I liked (not loved) the signing at the time. But Harty looks slower this year, and seems to have no synch with Allen. He’s been pretty good on punt returns, but pretty much a dud at WR. As ineffective as McKenzie was last year, it’s disappointing that Harty hasn’t been an upgrade.Sherfield: I never understood the hype either. With that said, I think it was a significant upgrade over Kumerow in the “backup WR/core special teamer” spot. Which is nice, but doesn’t particularly move the needle on offense.
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Shaw66 said:
Brady's exactly right: it's on him. Except that he's only been on the job for two weeks.
The failure of that play was a training issue, and the necessary training takes place in the off-season and continues into the season. Allen and Davis have to KNOW what to do on that play, know every little aspect of it, and beyond knowing they have to actually do it when the time comes. Someone screwed up because he wasn't well enough trained, and that problem is an offensive coordinator problem. It's his job to be sure that his coaches - the QB coach and the wide receiver coach - are holding their players to the appropriate high standard.
During the broadcast, Romo was emphatic about it being Davis's mistake. He was talking about what he was trained to do, so it might not be the same for the Bills, but he said that going deep against single coverage, when he beats the coverage the wide receiver must look back and find the ball BEFORE making his cut. If Davis had looked back, he would have tracked the ball into the end zone to win the game. If that's right, then Davis wasn't trained well enough, and that's on Dorsey and the wide receivers' coach. Brady was correct organizationally - it's on the OC, but in his defense, he wasn't the OC when Davis should have been drilled about this.
People point to the Davis mistake as another tally on the condemn-Davis ledger. Yes, it belongs on that side of the ledger, but there was a lot of excellent play from Davis in that game that goes on the other side.
Phenomenal post, and it really articulates a point that was too often missing from the Dorsey discourse. It drove me nuts hearing people say variations of, “Don’t blame Dorsey; it’s on the players for not executing.” For some things, that’s completely true - Gabe’s dropped pass INT a couple weeks ago for example.
But in this case, the problem was that two players weren’t on the same page. Pretty much by definition, that means the offense wasn’t coordinated. And that’s primarily the responsibility of - you guessed it - the offensive coordinator.
-
2
-
-
FML
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, PBF81 said:
Actually that's not true. Take away Shakir's big play and we put up slightly below-average what their opponents have in terms of passing yards, and only more than the Broncos, Chargers, Raiders, and Giants. Conspicuously two of the teams we beat and one that we lost to. Without that play, we'd have been right smack in the average of what they've allowed against them, and only 4 more yards than Denver, and otherwise, again, only ahead of the Raiders, Chargers, and Giants.
This is poor methodology. (Leaving aside for the moment that you can't actually "take away Shakir's big play", because that's not how statistical analysis works.) For an apples to apples comparison, you would need to also take away the biggest offensive play from each other Jets opponent. Since Shakir's TD was the longest passing TD in the league this year, that exercise would presumably still drop us relative to everyone else. But intentionally handicapping 1 team's results while leaving all other team's untouched is disingenuous. Yeah, if you remove the positives from the analysis, what's left will be neutral or negative. No duh, but it doesn't tell us anything.
-
1
-
-
44 minutes ago, Long Suffering Fan said:
Great job, Hoof. I appreciate this analysis.
If I were to quibble, I would say that it is not all shotgun runs in all situations that are the problem. The ones that don't pass (my) eye test are ones to Cook, on a delay with him standing there, where he runs between the tackles. Sometimes Josh even has to move toward Cook to give him the ball while he was standing there waiting for it.
The same run is not as bad with other RBs and the one where Cook runs in front of Allen and takes the shotgun handoff also seems to be better. I don't know if it is just because Cook is at his best when he has speed or that he is running outside.
This. Even if you don't run the Tush Push, threatening it forces the defense to commit to stopping it. Just going to shotgun in that situation seems counter intuitive...and we had a very obvious example where it failed spectactulary.
Agreed. I have zero problem with going shotgun on third or fourth and 3, or even 2. There’s still a threat to run, whether that’s a handoff or a QB run. It’s specifically 1 yard and in where I think it’s criminal to not be under center. We don’t have to sneak it every time, but I want the defense to have to defend the sneak every time.
Case in point: The recent game where we had a third or fourth and goal from about the half yard line, right as the quarter ended. They interviewed the opposing coach during the commercial break, and asked him what he thought we were going to do. His response: “I think the quarterback is going to run the ball.” Then we came out in shotgun and eliminated all threat of a sneak. Dumb.
-
1
-
-
21 hours ago, Richard Noggin said:
There is a lurking downside to the Bills OC job that counters your bolded claim (that this OC job is as appealing as it's ever been): the Head Coach.
Fair point! My counterpoint: Everyone has seen by now that there’s some heat on McD. Strong chance that the next OC hire is also first in line for the interim HC job if McD gets fired. -
5 hours ago, Einstein said:
A new OC every 2 years (on average) doesn't seem high to you? It does to me.
The problem is that most of his peers (high-end coaches), ARE the offensive mind of the team.
Reid - Offensive guruMcVay - Offensive guru
Shanahan - Offensive guru
Payton - Offensive guru
Pederson - Offensive guru
LaFleur - Offensive guy
Sirianni - Offense guyMcDaniel - Offensive guru
Taylor - Offensive guy
Caroll is a defensive guy. He has had 3 offensive coordinators in 14 years.
Tomlin is a defensive guy. He has had 4 offensive coordinators in 16 years.Belichick is a defensive guy. He has had 4 offensive coordinators in 22 years.
Only successful guy I can think of with a lot of changes are Vrabel and Harbaugh.
Thanks for your response! I appreciate the legwork you did here. I notice that everyone you listed as a peer has won a Super Bowl - not sure if that was intentional or not. And yeah, he doesn’t stack up to those guys at this point. Fully agree with that.The bad news: Out of 3 OC hires, McDermott has made a bad hire twice.
The good news for us fans: In both cases, McD recognized his mistake relatively early.
The good news for potential OC candidates: This will be the first time the job is open to external candidates AND there’s a franchise QB in place. It’s a much more appealing job than it was in 2017 or 2018. Plus, any serious candidate would likely be an option for interim HC if McDermott was ultimately fired.
(Side note: I think the # for Belichick looks off. I’m guessing because they like to not officially name an OC some years? I can think of Weis, McDaniels (who should count as 2, a la Grover Cleveland), BOB, and Patricia off the top of my head, and I feel like I must be missing at least 1-2 more?)
-
1 hour ago, Einstein said:
Agree with you.Im sure most up and coming guys would love to work with Allen.
Not so sure about wanting to work with McD though.
They would be the 4th OC in 8 seasons.
How does that compare to his peers? It doesn’t seem crazy high to me. -
Bills 24
Jets 13
I think we see signs of life from the offense, which makes the defense’s job easier. Their D is legitimately great, so I won’t be surprised if we still have a few drives fizzle and don’t hit 30.
-
1
-
-
15 minutes ago, Bob Jones said:
Coaches tell JA to throw into double or triple coverage? Coaches tell JA to ignore the underneath routes and throw deep downfield when it's 3rd and short? Coaches tell JA to get happy feet and abandon the pocket when there’s no need to? Coaches tell JA to make virtually every throw at full velocity? Coaches tell JA to make inaccurate throws to open receivers? OK, LOL. I'm done here.
Whose job is it to work with Allen on correcting his mistakes? Whose job is it to give Allen feedback on what went wrong and how he can do better next time? Whose in charge of establishing the first read on a given play?Yes, Allen needs to play better. It’s the job of the coaches to facilitate that. Since you know this stuff definitively, I’ll ask you: how was Dorsey working with Allen to correct those mistakes? Was Dorsey just yelling at Allen to do better, or was he giving actionable feedback in a way that clicked for Allen? Also, how did you manage to sneak into the room for all these meetings without being caught?
-
7 hours ago, BuffaloBillsGospel2014 said:
This is simply not true, I've heard HC McDermott now going on 2 press conferences with him stating that "all phases need to get better and it starts with me". He even said "the defense hasn't been perfect but they played their asses off today". You can listen to both his press conferences and he says those lines about himself and about coaching the defense in both of them so I'm not sure where you're getting that he doesn't hold himself accountable, he clearly does. I'm not for or against him right now, I'm in a wait and see approach but you're spewing facts that just aren't true, go listen to both those interviews entirely and you'll hear him say those exact lines and I'm not calling you out or anything, maybe you didn't hear the full press conference but it's in there.
It’s weird that the two military veterans were both comparing McD’s “accountability” to military structures, when we’re really talking about public statements in press conferences. Maybe I’m way off, but I don’t think the top brass does much in the way of explaining F-ups to the public when they happen. I was under the impression that that sort of accountability was mostly handled away from the public eye. We fans ARE the public eye.
I forgot to add my two cents about McDermott in my last post, so I’ll do it here. Number one thing for me: I don’t see how firing McD this week gets us into the playoffs this year. If/when we’re mathematically eliminated? Go for it. But as long as there’s a chance of us making a run, we need to maximize that chance. (With the caveat that if he’s lost the team a la Josh McDaniels and the Raiders, he has to go right away. None of us can know that from out here, though.)
I wasn’t a McDermott fan from the start, but he generally won me over. @Shaw66 made some great arguments around McD’s leadership and ability to establish a winning culture. And I saw for myself an ability to learn from his mistakes. That’s extremely important to me, because everyone will make mistakes whether you like it or not. As much as I HATED it when he benched Tyrod for Peterman, I ultimately gained some respect for McD in the aftermath. Why? Because he admitted he made a mistake and apologized to the team, and course-corrected afterwards. There are other examples, but this post is long enough already.
With all that said, I think the blunder on Monday night hits the level of a fireable offense pretty much on its own. And to some extent, I think @GunnerBill is right that McD might have too much on his gameday plate. I wouldn’t mind it if he handed off defensive play calling to one of his assistants to let him be just a head coach during the game.
-
2
-
-
Great post @Shaw66 - you set a high bar and this one easily cleared it.
Also some great counter-arguments in this thread as well with some valid points.
My two cents: Firing Dorsey, in hindsight, was overdue. I would’ve been fine canning him after the Bengals game, or at least stripping him off play calling duties, but McD is more conservative than I am, so Dorsey got an extra week. I wish Dorsey the best, but he had to go.
Will it help? We’ll find out soon enough. I think it’ll help at least somewhat, but I don’t think it’ll be a panacea. The defense and special teams are bad. The defense somehow manages to hold up for long stretches every week, but they don’t have the talent to get stops when we need them. We need an offense that can get 30 most weeks in spite of bad field position, and put us up 2 scores or more when the opposing team gets the ball for the last time.
-
I voted No, but that’s meant as a snapshot of right now. There’s still time for McD to change my mind. The 12 man penalty costing us that game is a fireable offense IMO. But with no clear replacement on staff, there’s no point in firing him now - that won’t get us into the playoffs.
If we stay on roughly this trajectory, McD should be fired as soon as we’re mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. If we turn it around, I’m open to bringing him back, depending on the specifics of the turnaround.
-
McD for sure. Look at his immediate postgame comments from the last few game - especially last week. Contrast those with the ones from earlier in the year. He’s been unhappy with the offense for a while, getting unhappier every week, and it showed after the game last week. McD usually goes out of his way to never criticize anyone publicly.
IMO McD hasn’t been shy about telling Dorsey this stuff in private, and Dorsey knew the Broncos game was his last chance. McD remains overly loyal, and probably gave Dorsey one chance too many. But I’m glad he pulled the trigger now instead of waiting for the bye. The offense has no excuse for being this disjointed every game.
-
This might be a fireable offense.
-
1
-
-
4 hours ago, boyst said:
What is something you need to see to change your mind on this team tonight? If you're a Kool-Aid drinker - what needs to happen tonight to make you change your mind that we are a pretender? If you're a doomsday singer - what needs to happen tonight to change your mind that we are a contender? If you're flatlined and listless - what needs to happen tonight to make it tingle that we have bloodflow?
As others have said, there’s nothing that could single-handedly right the emotional ship tonight. But they could take some steps in the right direction. If they sustain success for a few games, that’s when I’d start to Billieve again. Here are some things that would be good to see tonight:-Offense scores over 30 points
-Multiple drives where it looks easy
(Bonus points for drives after the scripted plays and also outside of the 2 minute warning)
-Zero INTs
-Run game is effective, with or without Allen running
-Zero drives that short circuit just outside of FG range
Against a bad defense, at least some of these should be doable. If we see another offensive performance where everything is just such a freaking struggle, I have to think they’ll make a change.
-
Under. Most owners aren’t willing to give a HC job to someone who was just fired from his OC job.
-
22 hours ago, HappyDays said:
The stats shown at the beginning are an indicator of bad defense and special teams. Like 5th best in TDs per drive since week 5, but only 18th in total points over that time span, that is clearly a time of possession stat. As Brett Kollmann points out, field position is another huge issue. Our offense has a middling run game and only one elite pass catcher, and it's being asked to execute perfectly on long drives with very few opportunities for explosive plays. That is not a recipe for success.
Good analysis of the run game schematic issues too. @HoofHearted pointed out that 2 of our 8 called runs versus Cincy featured a schematic flaw that literally drew the defender to the spot where they made the tackle.
And unfortunately I don't think the myriad of factors causing these issues are fixable at this point in the season. Pretty much our only chance of sustained success against decent teams right now is everyone on offense executing perfectly throughout the game, and that is just not a realistic ask.
I think some of them are fixable this season. Design of shotgun runs? Maybe not so much. But some of it is just down to play calling, and especially play calling right as we cross midfield. The under center run game is still working, and play action from under center is crushing it. Mixing in more plays from under center in that area of the field could make a big difference, and should be very doable.
How much of the problem is McDermott wanting to be conservative? After last week, I’m thinking not a ton, or at least not directly. McDermott wants to be too conservative sometimes, that much is true. But he’s not stupid, and he’s clearly not happy with the way the offense is performing. He’ll never blame anyone else publicly, so it’s hard to know what he really thinks. My hope is that he’s ready to give someone else a try at play calling at this point.
I’ve given up hope that Dorsey will improve as a play caller. I don’t see much benefit in firing him now, unless things have gotten so bad that it would be a morale boost. But I think a five game swoon is enough to give a crack to one of the other offensive staffers with play calling experience.
Note: I don’t think there’s need to publicly advertise it if/when Dorsey is stripped of play calling duties. But I would make sure McDermott and Dorsey both have answers ready in case it’s asked in a press conference.
Time to rewrite the Conventional Wisdom on the playoff loss to Bengals--and the new CW on Dorsey too
in The Stadium Wall
Posted
I was one of the many people calling for Dorsey's firing this year, and I'm glad he was fired - the results are clear as day on the field. But some of these people pretending the hire was out of left field or nepotism or whatever? That's weird. Either terrible memories, or just being blinded by pre-existing notions about McDermott.
At the time of Daboll's departure, Dorsey was the QB coach who worked with Allen during Allen's meteoric rise. Whoever filled that QB coach spot from 2019-2021 was guaranteed to be a hot name for OC jobs, even without prior OC or playcalling experience. I believe it was widely reported that Daboll offered Dorsey the OC job with the Giants. On top of that, it's typical for a team who loses a coordinator to a HC job to look to promote someone in-house for continuity purposes. Dorsey was the natural and obvious in-house candidate, and had the public endorsement of our star QB.
Now, was it a good hire? No, obviously not. Was it in any way controversial at the time? No. Is it possible to guarantee success with any hire? Also no. In hindsight, maybe the Bills should've interviewed some outside candidates, but I don't think it would've made any difference - Dorsey likely would've had the strongest resume regardless of who interviewed. Especially when considering the choice was between "promote Dorsey and backfill QB coach" or "outside hire OC and still backfill QB coach, b/c Dorsey's OC for the Giants."
Where I think the Bills/McDermott really went wrong was in bringing back Dorsey for 2023. Behind the scenes, there must have been warning signs in 2022 that Dorsey wasn't going to be the guy. But I also think it's pretty unfair to criticize McDermott for not firing Dorsey after 1 season on the job. If he had, it would've been very controversial and drawn a ton of negative press. Probably would've been the right move in hindsight, but I don't recall seeing a single opinion either in media or on this board calling for Dorsey's dismissal this offseason.