San-O Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 Cringe away then...the Bills should have run the ball more this year. You have to complete passes to move the ball...and the completions can't be for 2-5 yards all the time. I have no problem with passing the ball a lot, when it is working...when the passing game isn't getting it done, and you have a running back who is gaining nice yardage, you have to run the ball then...and then, maybe, the passing game has some breathing room. I think Gailey's attachment to his passing fancy, when his running game was firing on most cylandars, cost the Bills legit chances to win the Titans and the second Miami game. + 1 Bingo.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) Stats be damned. Watch the freaking games. Get a piece of paper and a pencil. Before every play consider: 1) the score 2) the down and distance 3) the time remaining 4) the field position 5) the momentum flow of the game. Decide whether you would prefer to see a run or a pass. Then see what the play is. Mark down on your paper how many times you agreed or disagreed with the play call. Edited January 3, 2012 by San Jose Bills Fan
Best Player Available Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 Your analogy is flawed. The league didn't become a passing league just because teams started to win with it. The anchovies weren't JUST following the leader. The league became a passing league because that's what the NFL wanted to see happen. The NFL changed the rules of the game to cater to a pass happy and scoring frenzied approach because that's what fans wanted to see. People don't tune in to watch games that finish 13-6. Again, you can buck the trend if you want, and the Bills have been doing that for 12 years. Look where it's gotten them. yea, you are correct with the league wanting it ($$$). But i disagree that the Bills have been doing it for 12 years, well at least they haven't been doing it well. Also, I never remember Gailey saying he wanted to run first. And the stats show zero commitment to a running game. That said anchovies are a great bait fish if you like eating salmon. Just saying.
Picnic Table F'er Posted January 3, 2012 Author Posted January 3, 2012 Cringe away then...the Bills should have run the ball more this year. You have to complete passes to move the ball...and the completions can't be for 2-5 yards all the time. I have no problem with passing the ball a lot, when it is working...when the passing game isn't getting it done, and you have a running back who is gaining nice yardage, you have to run the ball then...and then, maybe, the passing game has some breathing room. I think Gailey's attachment to his passing fancy, when his running game was firing on most cylandars, cost the Bills legit chances to win the Titans and the second Miami game. Actually after reading this again. I can agree with it as an in-game (short term) strategy when it's just obvious your passing game won't work that day. What I mean to say is build the passing game as a long term strategy. When building our roster and planning for games the Bills should keep moving in the direction they are headed. More passing and a stronger passing attack. Get some WR's on the team who can make it 16 games healthy and get another TE. It's the new NFL and we need to play like it's 2012 in NFL.
dave mcbride Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 (edited) tgreg is of course completely correct. Denver averaged 193 rushing yards per game for the 9 games that Tebow started, but only scored 20 points or more 3 times. In their first five games, they scored 20 or more points four times. When they became a run dominant team, they simply couldn't score. I chalk it up to nostalgia for past eras. Edited January 3, 2012 by dave mcbride
Best Player Available Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 Actually after reading this again. I can agree with it as an in-game (short term) strategy when it's just obvious your passing game won't work that day. What I mean to say is build the passing game as a long term strategy. When building our roster and planning for games the Bills should keep moving in the direction they are headed. More passing and a stronger passing attack. Get some WR's on the team who can make it 16 games healthy and get another TE. It's the new NFL and we need to play like it's 2012 in NFL. As currently constructed we don't have the quarterback, receivers or quality tackles (left anyway) to be a passing team. other than that were good to go.
dave mcbride Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 If you're ever in Monterey Ca. Go to the aquarium, there you will see huge tanks of anchovies. The thing about those little fish is, you can have thousands of them following one another. Then one changes course and the whole school follows suit. The reason I used that analogy is because the stock market and the NFL use the same silly principle. So if the NFL is now considered a passing league for 8+ years. If a team in the NFL were to say screw the passing game, I want our attack to revolve around a power running game and build a bruising O-line to accomplish that goal. Maybe to mask a Quarterback who has a very limited range of accuracy? Now lets say the team that tries that novel running game approach in a pass happy league was to go to the super bowl and WIN with it. How many teams would follow suit the following year(s)? especially ones with marginal or in some cases no quarterback that can get the passing game going. I'm guessing more than one. There's only so many Brees, Rodgers, Mannigs, and Brady's to go around. Not saying we should do it. But someday someone will (again). A team is trying that this year. And they can't freaking score.
reddogblitz Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 A team is trying that this year. And they can't freaking score. Yes but they are in the playoffs which more than us and 21 other teams can say.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 3, 2012 Posted January 3, 2012 It's about context. When your passing game is Drew Brees throwing to Colston, Graham and Meacham, throw the ball like crazy. When it's Aaron Rodgers throwing to Jennings, Finley and Nelson, do the same. Tom Brady throwing to Welker, Gronkowski and Hernandez...well, you get the picture. When you've got Ryan Fitzpatrick back there and a ragtag bunch of receivers and TEs, AND your two most explosive players are your two running backs, you run the ball. Whether it's a passing league or not.
mrags Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 When both of your RBs are averaging over 5 yards a carry AND are great WRs.....yes it would make a difference in the W/L column. Agree with this 100% PD. If we ran in the following games when we had the lead or the game was close we would couldn't have die any worse than the outcomes we had. Bengles Miami #2 Titans Pats #2 Giants I'm not saying we would have won these for fact. But I'm sure you know where I'm going with this. We couldn't have done much worse. The point is, when you have a lead, run th ball, kill the clock and keep guys like Manning, Brady off the field as much as possible.
thewildrabbit Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Its not just that the NFL is a "passing league" Its also a place where "elite" QB's are catered to and watched out for. Look at the last 8 super bowls & the winners, 2011 Packers- Steelers 2010 Saints-Colts, 2009 Steelers- Cardinals 2008, NY Giants- Patriots 2007 Colts - Bears 2006 Steelers-Seahawks 2005 Patriots-Eagles 2004 Panthers-Patriots Arron Rodgers future HoFer Payton Manning 2x, one win HoFer Ben Rothlisberger 3x one win HoFer Tom Brady3x two wins HoFer Drew Brees Hofer Eli Manning tweener Donovan McNabb- semi scrub Rex Grossman-scrub Curt Warner- future HoFer Jake Delhomme-scrub Look at the QB's, you don't necessarily need an "elite" QB to get there, sure looks like you need one to win it. If guys like Delhomme & Rex Grossman can make to a SB I don't see why Fitz can't either. Also, you don't need an elite passing offense to get there, as the Seahawks-Panthers-Bears-Giants ran the ball with authority during their SB runs, and in Mannings instance he got incredibly lucky with one pass to get his win against a team that hadn't lost a game all year.
mrags Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Its not just that the NFL is a "passing league" Its also a place where "elite" QB's are catered to and watched out for. Look at the last 8 super bowls & the winners, 2011 Packers- Steelers 2010 Saints-Colts, 2009 Steelers- Cardinals 2008, NY Giants- Patriots 2007 Colts - Bears 2006 Steelers-Seahawks 2005 Patriots-Eagles 2004 Panthers-Patriots Arron Rodgers future HoFer Payton Manning 2x, one win HoFer Ben Rothlisberger 3x one win HoFer Tom Brady3x two wins HoFer Drew Brees Hofer Eli Manning tweener Donovan McNabb- semi scrub Rex Grossman-scrub Curt Warner- future HoFer Jake Delhomme-scrub Look at the QB's, you don't necessarily need an "elite" QB to get there, sure looks like you need one to win it. If guys like Delhomme & Rex Grossman can make to a SB I don't see why Fitz can't either. Also, you don't need an elite passing offense to get there, as the Seahawks-Panthers-Bears-Giants ran the ball with authority during their SB runs, and in Mannings instance he got incredibly lucky with one pass to get his win against a team that hadn't lost a game all year. In all fairness to the "elite defenses" crowd, the Packers, Steelers, Giants, Panthers, and 2 of the 3 Patriots teams all had very good to "elite" defenses. The others had prolific QBs and offenses: Cardinals/Warner, Patriots/Brady, Eagles/McNabb, Packers/Rodgers. Yes, most of the teams had both but who gets the credit? How bout it's easier to say you need a pretty damn good team overall to win the SuperBowl, most teams don't accomplish this. Let's just try and accumulate talent on as Many positions as possible and not lose the talent that we already have like Stevie, and Freddie and build onto that. In all fairness it's easier to build a good enough team overall than to get an elite QB and frankly if you ended up doing that you'd end up like the Colts this year, a 2 win team without your star player I stead of your expected 12 wins. Houston seems to have got it, they lose Johnson for a bit, Schaub, and Williams and yet they still win the division because they are a much better team all around.
8-8 Forever? Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 I'm reading a super interesting article from Gregg Easterbrook. I find myself agreeing with him a lot this time. Usually don't agree with him much. This bit really stands out for me. http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/_/id/7415167/green-bay-new-england-make-history-strong-offenses-weak-defenses Yep. Good post.
justnzane Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 tgreg is of course completely correct. Denver averaged 193 rushing yards per game for the 9 games that Tebow started, but only scored 20 points or more 3 times. In their first five games, they scored 20 or more points four times. When they became a run dominant team, they simply couldn't score. I chalk it up to nostalgia for past eras. however they won how many games that Tebow started? To everyone in Tgreg's camp, normally I would agree that you should be pass heavy in this NFL. However, once Freddie went down, it was pretty obvious that the opposing defenses keyed on the pass and dared the Bills to run. When CJ started running efficiently, Gailey should have ran the ball more, especially with the other teams playing pass far more often. Also, they should have ran more of a west coast scheme heavier on rollouts over a spread scheme to change the dimension of the field to support the receivers' ability to get open. Gailey deserves a lot of blame for not adjusting his scheme in game enough to compensate for personnel flaws.
dave mcbride Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 however they won how many games that Tebow started? To everyone in Tgreg's camp, normally I would agree that you should be pass heavy in this NFL. However, once Freddie went down, it was pretty obvious that the opposing defenses keyed on the pass and dared the Bills to run. When CJ started running efficiently, Gailey should have ran the ball more, especially with the other teams playing pass far more often. Also, they should have ran more of a west coast scheme heavier on rollouts over a spread scheme to change the dimension of the field to support the receivers' ability to get open. Gailey deserves a lot of blame for not adjusting his scheme in game enough to compensate for personnel flaws. They certainly didn't win because of their offense, that's for sure. They won because of their defense and luck (e.g., the Bears game). At the end of the day, they're an 8-8 team that was outscored 390-309. As for being a playoff team, they're simply enjoying the dumb luck of playing in a terrible division where the best team by far (SD) choked away too many games. The Broncos are a bad team with a bad offense, but they are lucky.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 (edited) I'm reading a super interesting article from Gregg Easterbrook. I find myself agreeing with him a lot this time. Usually don't agree with him much. This bit really stands out for me. QuoteThe most efficient rushing team this season, Carolina, gained 5.4 yards per attempt, and finished with a losing record. The second-most efficient rushing team, Minnesota, with 5.2 yards per attempt, finished 3-13. Gaining the most yards per try with passing plays is the winning football formula of the moment. http://espn.go.com/e...s-weak-defenses I haven't read the article myself. I might find it interesting, too. From the bit quoted and the title of your post I cringe when anyone says the Bills should run the ball more it sounds as though two things are being conflated: 1) rushing or passing efficiency - how many yards, on average, per rushing or passing attempt 2) number of rushing or passing attempts The author, in the bit you quoted, is saying it really doesn't lead to success in the NFL if you gain >5 ypa than if you gain ~ 4 ypa. When people say "the Bills should run the ball more", they are saying the Bills should have more rushing attempts. I would tend to agree with the former - as long as you move the chains consistently, 5.4 vice 4 ypa rushing no big diff. I also strongly agree with the latter. When we look at Carolina and at the Vikes, we see that in rushing ATTEMPTS they fall to #13 and #14. Would they have better success if they ran the ball more? Doubtful, until/unless they acquire a defense that is not in the bottom 6 for points given up. If you're passing a lot, and you gain a lot of yards with it, you're typically scoring fast. You better have a D that doesn't give up a lot of points. Interestingly, there are 3 playoff teams in the bottom third of the league for points given up - Denver, Giants, and Lions. It's a nice theory anyway. We'll see how it plays out. If the Steelers, Niners, Ravens, or Texans win the Superbowl will it be re-thought? If the Niners win can we get a double retraction? Edit: I just went and read the article and I think it's misleading - disingenuous. He blows on for half of it about how GB and NE are the worst defenses in the league. The problem with this is, they are only the worst Ds by YARDAGE. Yardage, last I looked, does not win you games. POINTS win games. Where are NE and GB on points? In the middle-third of the league - 15 and 19 respectively for points against. Not great, but not the cellar, either. And it's not that they play keep-away, both give opponents the ball close to half of the game. The Steelers, Niners, Ravens, and Texans, BTW, are 1-4 on D by points against. A team is trying that this year. And they can't freaking score. Actually I think two teams are trying that this year. One is the 2nd seed in the NFC. The other is 3rd seed in the AFC. The former has won as many games as the Patriots and is #2 D on PA. The latter is on its 4th quarterback and is #4 D on PA. So can we please just chillax a bit on declaring defense irrelevant and playoffs impossible without Diamond Arm leading the huddle on O? Let the Games begin! Edited January 4, 2012 by Hopeful
BillsVet Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 Fun facts... Ryan Fitzpatrick threw the football 569 TIMES for 6.7 yards per attempt. Fred Jeckson carried the ball 170 times for 5.5 average CJ Spiller carried the ball 107 times for 5.2 average If Fitzpatrick is our QB next year this team must have a completely balanced attack. Maybe Gailey is to blame for turning Fitzpatrick's early season golden arm into a chicken wing. 6.7 ypa is nothing to brag about. Fitz ranked 23rd in the league with that number. A team needs to throw deep with some degree of accuracy to have a balanced offense in the NFL of 2011. It's not "the new NFL" anymore. It's been a passing league for nearly 8 years. The Bills -- as an organization and as a fan base -- are well behind the curve on this (as they usually are). This is why you don't see RBs go high in the first round anymore (well, unless you're the Bills). The Spiller pick, as was said many times when it happened, was a sure sign that Nix and company are still playing in a different era. This team is not built to pass. From the O-Line to the QB to the WRs. It's not really built to do much of anything other than to continue to break our hearts. Kinda like going from a Tamp 2, to a 3-4, and possibly to a 4-3 in the span of 2 years. Teams don't turn on a dime and begin drafting without losing a lot in the transition. The treadmill to nowhere continues, but I digress. Teams win by passing the ball. Heck, NE threw it almost 700 times this year.
CosmicBills Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 6.7 ypa is nothing to brag about. Fitz ranked 23rd in the league with that number. A team needs to throw deep with some degree of accuracy to have a balanced offense in the NFL of 2011. Kinda like going from a Tamp 2, to a 3-4, and possibly to a 4-3 in the span of 2 years. Teams don't turn on a dime and begin drafting without losing a lot in the transition. The treadmill to nowhere continues, but I digress. Teams win by passing the ball. Heck, NE threw it almost 700 times this year. Absolutely. The treadmill to nowhere is a great example. This team needs a focus in its direction. There isn't any. Not even on the defensive side of the ball where the team spent nearly all of its draft picks last year. Are we a 3-4 team or a 4-3 team? Are we a hybrid? If Wanny switches back to his roots, where does that leave half the players Nix brought in on defense who no longer fit the system? They keep tinkering with the wrong parts: RB, CB, DT and ignoring the parts that really matter in terms of winning in the modern NFL: QB, WR, OL. I'd be fine with the team suffering growing pains if I believed there truly was a plan at OBD to build a winner. But from everything they've shown us in 2 seasons, there isn't. And from everything the organization has shown us over the past 15 years -- that won't change any time soon. Awesome.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 6.7 ypa is nothing to brag about. Fitz ranked 23rd in the league with that number. A team needs to throw deep with some degree of accuracy to have a balanced offense in the NFL of 2011. Teams win by passing the ball. Heck, NE threw it almost 700 times this year. The people who think the Bills throw the ball too much are saying that in spite of being unable to pass the ball effectively they still insisted on throwing the ball. What is a team to do when it has a rash of injuries at wide receiver and offensive line and a quarterback who seems to be pressing and getting worse with each week? Fitz's YPA was poor and the teams yards per carry was excellent. Of course you have to pass well to be successful in this league. But what if you can't pass well? That's the point.
CosmicBills Posted January 4, 2012 Posted January 4, 2012 The people who think the Bills throw the ball too much are saying that in spite of being unable to pass the ball effectively they still insisted on throwing the ball. What is a team to do when it has a rash of injuries at wide receiver and offensive line and a quarterback who seems to be pressing and getting worse with each week? Fitz's YPA was poor and the teams yards per carry was excellent. Of course you have to pass well to be successful in this league. But what if you can't pass well? That's the point. The past 12 years has given you the answer to that query.
Recommended Posts