The Bills' method of winning is unsustainable.

[EasternOHBillsFan]

I know I'm going to take some flak for this, and that there will be no shortage of people willing to write comments like "we're 4-1, be happy," or "a win is a win. It doesn't matter how you do it."

 

But a method of winning that will work over the long haul is fundamentally different from, and superior to, a method of winning that will soon fizzle out. The Bills' method of winning seems to be in the latter category.

 

I am TOTALLY with you. What does this team do on defense when the turnovers dry up, because eventually they will? A lot of it has to do with the work we have to finish on defense, to bring in more talent to supplement what we have. This year is great, but to win a championship building on years like this is crucial to moving forward. Let the Sunshine People tell you and I that this season is the greatest and we're totally awesome and we'll be 10-6 and that's just peachy, but when it comes down to it the coaches and players know that only the Super Bowl will do.

 

I will enjoy this season, but only knowing that there is more work to be done. 2011=1988, and to get to 1990 we're climbing the mountain, Edwards' Arm! GO BILLS!!!!!!!!

[Orton's Arm]

What I don't get is how some posters are all over the people that are concerned with the defense. By being concerned with the defense somehow a fan instantly becomes a "negative nancy", "never happy", "a nitpicker".

 

I'm pretty sure 99% of the fans are happy with the record of the team right now. I know I am. However, I am concerned with the defense. I think the OP makes some very valid points. I'm not going to turn a blind eye to what concerns me simply because of a "W". That would be ignorant of me I think. Can you see any coaches doing that? Coach: "We won, so our team is fine. We don't need to practice harder or work on anything to get better because, well, you know...we got a W."

 

I guess I just had to vent because I don't see the justification in posters jumping all over other posters for being concerned about a weakness (as those posters see it).

 

Put me on board, I'm concerned about the defense. Put me on board, I'm very excited about this season and I see room for improvement and also have faith that the coaches will improve this team, as well as the players. I think they are doing very well and are hard working and will only get better. I just want to see the defense make some more 3rd down stops. I guess to some that makes me a bad fan.

 

Thanks for the post OP.

Thanks for the intelligent response.

 

Good coaches warn against getting too high after a win, or too down after a loss. I interpret that to be a rejection of the mentality that, "we're winning, everything is fine," as well as "we're losing, so there are no positives anywhere." It's good to keep an even keel, and to be aware of a team's strengths and weaknesses regardless of its record.

 

I'll also point out that winning does not necessarily beget winning. In 2001, Dick Jauron's Chicago Bears went 13-3. They followed that up the next season by going 4-12. He then went 7-9 the year after, which was his last year as the Bears' head coach.

 

The reason that 13-3 record didn't lead to winning over the long term is because those wins weren't built on something sustainable. As an example of a sustainable winning method, I'd point to the 49ers of the '80s. Their bread and butter play was a quick slat to Jerry Rice. They typically ran that play several times each game, and practiced it constantly. They knew they could count on Joe Montana to throw a perfect pass, and to hit Rice in stride. They also knew they could count on Rice to make the catch, and to exploit any YAC opportunities which may have been available.

 

More generally, I'd divide methods of winning into two categories. 1) Winning which relies on your own team being very good. (The 49ers of the '80s method.) 2) Winning which relies on the other team messing up. (For example, using a highly favorable turnover margin to compensate for your team's weaknesses in other areas.) This second method is less sustainable. Sooner or later the teams you face won't mess up.

[Kelly the Dog]

I don't think anyone is happy with giving up all those yards, including and especially the Bills coaches. But today in Gailey's press conference he said the simple, honest truth, you need one or the other. You either need to shut teams down, or you need to get turnovers. If you do both that's fabulous but it's very hard to do. The Bills intentionally in the last few weeks have made a conscious effort to attack the ball. That's what Gailey said.

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

Honestly, you are a loser. Scoring points wins games in todays NFL. Defense wins championships is an old mantra.

 

* * * * *

 

This might not be a superbowl year but ur a pu$$y.

 

That was a very enlightening post, but I'm having trouble understanding something about "today's NFL." I may just be missing something obvious (wouldn't be the first time), so my brother Darryl says you're probably just the man to help me out. Please read post #22 here:

 

http://forums.twobillsdrive.com/topic/136509-good-points-by-tmq/page__pid__2275033__st__20#entry2275033

 

Then explain to me why scoring points is more important in "today's NFL" than preventing the other team from scoring points.

[Chilly]

I guess he's expecting the Bills to regress to 3.5 turnovers a game.

[biglukes]

I'm still struggling to grasp why so many people think that it's a surefire bet that the Bills will stop getting turnovers? It amazes me how last year everyone complains that we aren't getting any turnovers and now this year we're essentially complaining that we're getting too many turnovers. It's mind boggling. You people who have to find a way to justify your belief that the Bills have to stop winning and start sucking again can keep at it. I'm more than happy to enjoy each win and watch them continue to pile up while you guys keep searching for another reason that it can't last.

[Captain Caveman]

I'll take the method of winning where we score more points than the team we're playing.

[EasternOHBillsFan]

I'm still struggling to grasp why so many people think that it's a surefire bet that the Bills will stop getting turnovers? It amazes me how last year everyone complains that we aren't getting any turnovers and now this year we're essentially complaining that we're getting too many turnovers. It's mind boggling. You people who have to find a way to justify your belief that the Bills have to stop winning and start sucking again can keep at it. I'm more than happy to enjoy each win and watch them continue to pile up while you guys keep searching for another reason that it can't last.

 

Searching while we give up 450 yards and have a -4 turnover ratio and only win by 7?

 

That's not searching, that is playing a most dangerous game... but I'm so glad you aren't coaching the Bills or playing the games... so glad, or we'd never improve.

[biglukes]

Searching while we give up 450 yards and have a -4 turnover ratio and only win by 7?

 

That's not searching, that is playing a most dangerous game... but I'm so glad you aren't coaching the Bills or playing the games... so glad, or we'd never improve.

Did I say anything about not trying to improve? Obviously you don't want to be giving up this many yards, but they're making it work. As it's been pointed out earlier in the thread multiple times, there are a bunch of other teams who have had success by scoring a lot of points and getting turnovers. I believe that as the season goes along the defense will stiffen up a bit more. But so many people talk like it's a foregone conclusion we won't be able to generate turnovers anymore soon and the offense won't be able to score. It's just as easy to flip that around and say the defense will tighten up yards wise and the offense will keep doing what their doing. But it's sooo much easier to say they'll regress than progress right?

Edited October 11, 2011 by biglukes

[bills-fan in arizona]

Sounds like us fans need to learn how to win too!!! Seriously, we are a competitive team and are somewhat relevant for the first time in a while. That being said, I remain cautiously optimistic because of the history of this franchise. I'm enjoying the ride and hope the winds have finally changed directions for our beloved Bills!!!

[manateefan]

What I have liked so far is that Buffalo has actually been scoring. They have good numbers in the red zone, where in previous years they stunk. And even when down can't count them out. I wish the defense wouldn't allow so much yardage but they have come up big at times. Already have one more interceptions thant they had all of last year. If Philly hadn't called their last time out, with Buffalo and inches, it might have been different. Good call by Gailey to go for it. Buffalo has for the most part been fun to watch this year.

Edited October 11, 2011 by manateefan

[BuffOrange]

I've seen about a half dozen posts saying this is a playoff team but not a Superbowl team, which to me sounds absolutely ridiculous. Any team that gets in the playoffs (with the possible exception of the dumb luck 7-9 Seahawks) has a legitimate shot of going to the Super Bowl.

 

But maybe I'm wrong, I mean, this year I think we could beat the Jets, but the patriots? NO WAY!!

 

Agreed! Once you are in the playoffs, anything can happen. Even the "dumb-luck Seahawks", who conventional sports wisdom says "had no business being there" knocked off the heavily favored Saints in a playoff game.

 

I don't think it's so ridiculous. Although recent history doesn't necessarily support this point, I still think it is very, very difficult to win 3 road games in the playoffs.

 

Bill Barnwell wrote an interesting article before the season that 10-6 teams only beat 7-9 teams on the road about 55% of the time - the double digit point spread in that NO-Seattle game was pretty ridiculous.

[Big Turk]

Can you name a year where tie breakers did not come into play in the NFL? The Bills are not in a bad position with tie breakers. YET. Not too many teams will go 0-4 v. the NFC so 1-3 and maybe even 2-2 won't kill them.

 

Bro, you don't eat crayonz, you eat lead paint chips..apparently a lot of them. Know what the NUMBER 1 tiebreaker is? WINS AND LOSSES. Would it have been better for us to have beaten the Bengals and lose to the Eagles? Sure, but but there is no known scenario except in your head where losing a game is advisable. The two are not mutually exclusive. You can have a good record against NFC opponents AND a good record against division and conference opponents. Its not like they are trading an NFC win for an AFC win.

 

At best your understanding of how tiebreakers work is incorrect.

 

Thanks for the intelligent response.

 

Good coaches warn against getting too high after a win, or too down after a loss. I interpret that to be a rejection of the mentality that, "we're winning, everything is fine," as well as "we're losing, so there are no positives anywhere." It's good to keep an even keel, and to be aware of a team's strengths and weaknesses regardless of its record.

 

I'll also point out that winning does not necessarily beget winning. In 2001, Dick Jauron's Chicago Bears went 13-3. They followed that up the next season by going 4-12. He then went 7-9 the year after, which was his last year as the Bears' head coach.

 

The reason that 13-3 record didn't lead to winning over the long term is because those wins weren't built on something sustainable. As an example of a sustainable winning method, I'd point to the 49ers of the '80s. Their bread and butter play was a quick slat to Jerry Rice. They typically ran that play several times each game, and practiced it constantly. They knew they could count on Joe Montana to throw a perfect pass, and to hit Rice in stride. They also knew they could count on Rice to make the catch, and to exploit any YAC opportunities which may have been available.

 

 

 

More generally, I'd divide methods of winning into two categories. 1) Winning which relies on your own team being very good. (The 49ers of the '80s method.) 2) Winning which relies on the other team messing up. (For example, using a highly favorable turnover margin to compensate for your team's weaknesses in other areas.) This second method is less sustainable. Sooner or later the teams you face won't mess up.

 

Bill Bellichick believes that most games aren't won, they are lost...

 

Most teams will make mistakes at some point and its up to th D to capitalize on them...

Edited October 11, 2011 by matter2003

[John in Jax]

I'll point out some differences between this Bills team and the teams you mentioned.

 

1) Those teams had better defenses than the Bills. There are those in this thread who've made it sound like the Bills' defense allows lots of yards, but few points. That simply isn't the case. The Patriots scored over 30 points on the Bills' defense, the Eagles scored 24, the Bengals scored 23, and the Raiders scored 35. These numbers are not the hallmark of a defense that bends but doesn't break, or that gives up tons of yards without giving up the score. This defense will often give up yards and the score . . . except when causing a turnover.

 

2) Just to add to point 1, the Bills' defense is (as some have pointed out), ranked in the mid-20s. That low ranking cannot be attributed to rules changes, because the rules are the same for everyone. I'll grant that rules changes have made it easier to score than ever before. But this defense has serious problems even after taking those rules changes into account.

 

3) Some have argued (correctly) that the way to win in today's NFL is to pass and to stop the pass. The Bills seem unable to do these things as well as the top-tier teams in the league--at least WRT the non-turnover-related aspects of the game.

 

4) The teams you mentioned were quarterbacked by Warner, Brees, Peyton Manning, and Aaron Rodgers. I'd argue that every quarterback on that list deserves to be a first ballot Hall of Fame player.

 

Last season, Fitzpatrick was a clear upgrade over Edwards, but played well below the level of anyone on that list. Fitz will never be able to do the things those quarterbacks can do, because he isn't nearly an accurate a passer as they are.

 

Back in the '70s, it was often felt a quarterback had to have elite arm strength to be elite. During the '80s, Bill Walsh designed an offense tailored to Joe Montana's abilities, thereby proving that a quarterback could be great even with a mediocre arm. Montana made up for his lack of arm strength with elite accuracy and the ability to hit receivers in perfect stride.

 

During the first three games of the Bills' season, it appeared as though Gailey may have taken the next big step forward in offensive evolution. His quarterback--Fitzpatrick--was neither strong-armed nor overly accurate. But what Fitz did have was elite-level decision-making ability. The offense Gailey designed would spread defenses out. It called on Fitz to use that elite decision-making ability to exploit whatever defensive weaknesses this created. Fitz would use his "good enough" arm strength and accuracy and his elite decision-making to play at an elite level.

 

However, the offense hasn't done as well these last two games as it had the first three. Maybe these last two games were an anomaly. Fitz may have been playing hurt against the Bengals, for example. Or maybe defenses are starting to catch up to Gailey's offensive scheme. Or maybe the offense looked better than it really was during those first three games due to its opponents' defensive weaknesses. I expect to have a better feel for the offense by the end of the season. But as of right now, Fitz has yet to demonstrate he can play at or near the level of Warner, Brees, Manning, or Rodgers. This being the case, it would be unwise to assume the Bills will be able to use the same model those teams used to achieve the same level of success they achieved.

 

Excellent post. The homers with rose-colored glasses AND blinders on, who refuse to accept the above facts, are living in a dream world. As they say, it is what it is.

[CardinalScotts]

This is year two of a three year build...just a bit ahead of schedule. They don't have to have a good defense right now your don't win the super bowl in September or October just build the best defense you can by late December. Stats are for losers - this league is about two things WINS and LOSSES it's a fairly easy concept PERIOD.

[Malazan]

The Bills should just forfeit every game as soon as they allow the other team to score. At that point, there's just no point to winning since it isn't a shut out.

 

Perfect is the enemy of good.

[thewildrabbit]

This is year two of a three year build...just a bit ahead of schedule. They don't have to have a good defense right now your don't win the super bowl in September or October just build the best defense you can by late December. Stats are for losers - this league is about two things WINS and LOSSES it's a fairly easy concept PERIOD.

To be honest I expected to see them play like somewhat like this at the end of last season, but then they were whomped in the last two games against the Jets and Patriots. . Well, not as good as this, the Bills have exceeded my expectations in many aspects so far this year. If you watched that MNF game with the Lions and Bears and both line were making so many mistakes and miscues, and as young as the Bills are on that line they are playing way better then expected.

 

Anyway, right now the Bills lead the NFL in turnovers. While that is something you can practice for, tip drills etc, you can't game plan that in. Also you can't expect that every game. Right now the Bills are incredibly lucky and that ball has been bouncing the right way for them all year so far. Perhaps this is just lady luck catching up to Buffalo for a decade of the ball bouncing the opposite way.

 

All I gotta say is, what happens when that ball starts bouncing the other way again? It will show the flaws in the offense and defense, and there are plenty!

[CardinalScotts]

To be honest I expected to see them play like somewhat like this at the end of last season, but then they were whomped in the last two games against the Jets and Patriots. . Well, not as good as this, the Bills have exceeded my expectations in many aspects so far this year. If you watched that MNF game with the Lions and Bears and both line were making so many mistakes and miscues, and as young as the Bills are on that line they are playing way better then expected.

 

Anyway, right now the Bills lead the NFL in turnovers. While that is something you can practice for, tip drills etc, you can't game plan that in. Also you can't expect that every game. Right now the Bills are incredibly lucky and that ball has been bouncing the right way for them all year so far. Perhaps this is just lady luck catching up to Buffalo for a decade of the ball bouncing the opposite way.

 

All I gotta say is, what happens when that ball starts bouncing the other way again? It will show the flaws in the offense and defense, and there are plenty!

 

 

 

 

Good teams get the bounces...bad teams don't - in other words you make your own breaks. For the interceptions they are right there for the deflections

[benderbender]

All I gotta say is, what happens when that ball starts bouncing the other way again? It will show the flaws in the offense and defense, and there are plenty!

 

Yep, when we're 4-12 we'll all say you were right and you'll feel so good inside! Like a puffy cloud filled with rainbows and sunshine

[ICanSleepWhenI'mDead]

Bro, you don't eat crayonz, you eat lead paint chips..apparently a lot of them. Know what the NUMBER 1 tiebreaker is? WINS AND LOSSES.

 

* * * * * *

 

At best your understanding of how tiebreakers work is incorrect.

 

Maybe he doesn't understand how they work, but at least he knows what they are.