Spin, Spin, Spin (Kelly out of context)

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Happened into a strong example of how people's words get spun out of context by media trying to make a controversy.

 

First we have this "Inside the Bills" feature with Chris Brown interviewing Jim Kelly

 

Kelly had an interesting point about what he feels will help Fitz the most this coming season in making the Bills a true playoff contender. “As offensive players we always say your defense is your best friend and you go out and get a Mark Anderson from the Patriots, a Mario Williams from the Texans, you get hopefully Shawne Merriman healthy now, a couple of great draft picks the last couple of years, if this team stays healthy and this defense stays healthy then Ryan Fitzpatrick’s best asset will be a dominating defense that will shorten the field for him so he doesn’t feel like he’s carrying the whole burden of the Buffalo Bills, not just the team, but the whole city on his shoulders,” said Kelly.

 

“He knows he can’t do it himself. Last year was his first year, but he didn’t have OTAs to help him prepare with his teammates and really jell as a team. So this is really his first year with a full offseason and getting familiar with the offense and the players he has around him. He has to play better and I think he knows it. He doesn’t need me to tell him that. I’ll tell you what though I’m more excited about this year than any of the last 10 years at least. I know that.”

 

Okay, my take on this is Jim is excited about the possibility of an improved D and how it will help the O. As a QB, he knows what it's like to feel that you have to carry the whole weight and he knows it will help Fitz to feel he doesn't have to do that any more. He's also not giving Fitz a pass - he's saying there were extenuating circumstances of no training camp and bad D, but Fitz mistakes have to go down and his play has to go up. Still, it's an overall positive article about Fitz and the Bills.

 

Now this article picks up part of the quote and spins it into the headline "Jim Kelly says Ryan Fitzpatrick has to play better", adding the lead paragraph: "Former Buffalo Bills great Jim Kelly believes that quarterback Ryan Fitzpatrick must play better this season and believes the Bills improved defense will only help take some of the pressure off of him." and the tail " I completely agree that Fitzpatrick must play better this season. Or else the Bills won’t have a shot at competing for a playoff spot." which makes it sound as though Kelly was quoted as saying "Fitzpatrick must play better or else the Bills won't have a shot at competing for a playoff spot". (emphasis mine).

 

Now, do we all think Fitz must do better than 23 INTs in a 16 game season? Yes, we do. Do we think he needs to find the chemistry/rhythm/freedom from chest injuries/better OL/whatever it was that had him top 5 in the league for completions the first 5 weeks, rather than the completion percentage he had in the last 8 weeks? Yes, we do. Do we all also realize that Alex Smith, Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, Tim Tebow, and TJ Yates all play on teams that went to the playoffs? In most cases, strong D and a strong running game took them there.

 

1. The spinning is interesting - taking a positive article which mostly focuses on the impact improved D can have on the offense and what the QB can do, and tosses in "he has to play better, he knows that, he doesn't need me to tell him that" as pretty much a throw-away line, and making it the focus as though Jim is dissing off Fitz - then adding in the part about not making the playoffs if Fitz doesn't play better and the D only taking off some of the pressure, stuff Jim didn't say.

 

2. IMO, the only thing Fitz absolutely HAS to do is cut down the mistakes, the INTs. Without that, he's as good or better a QB than 4 guys who went to the playoffs. Can he do it? The guys who led the league in INTs in 2009 and 2010 are generally recognized as very good or great QB and dialed way back on the mistake-ometer the following year. So it can be done.

 

3. Also IMO it's really about Chan - will Chan truly adapt his play calling to his personnel, or will he stay with a 1-back offense that kept either Spiller or Fredex under wraps, and with a pass-centric offense as though he has Brees or Rodgers under center throwing to Graham, Sproles, Nelson, and Jennings, week after week even if it falters?

[San Jose Bills Fan]

The same thing happened with Coach Gailey's comments about Vince Young.

 

In the interview, Gailey was highly complimentary of Young's work but several media outlets spun one sentence into "Young's having trouble picking up the offense."

 

It's good to have a functioning brain from which to draw your own conclusions… and to be armed with the sad knowledge that media will often try to stir up trouble to increase ratings/traffic.

[BobDVA]

IMO The Bills need to run the ball 40+ times per game. 20-25 for Jackson, 15-20 for Spiller. This team should lead the league in rushing, therefore, easily a top five defense...

[3rdand12]

Having watched/listened to enough Gailey and Nix interviews, those guys can get taken out of context alot. especially the dry wit. If you had not seen the twinkle in the eye or a hint of a smile it might be hard to tell that they were just funnin'.

You gotta do due diligence before forming an opinion about any media reports. know the source.

[jimmy10]

Gotta manufacture controversy to keep the clicks and eyeballs coming in what is probably the quietest time on the NFL calendar.

[swnybillsfan]

IMO The Bills need to run the ball 40+ times per game. 20-25 for Jackson, 15-20 for Spiller. This team should lead the league in rushing, therefore, easily a top five defense...

40 runs per game with fred/cj/gadget plays might be a really good thing. o linemen generally like to run block a hell of a lot more than pass block and rbs generally need to get into a rhythm, so i'm good with this formula. plus, it should open up the play-action passing game.

[Gray Beard]

3. Also IMO it's really about Chan - will Chan truly adapt his play calling to his personnel, or will he stay with a 1-back offense that kept either Spiller or Fredex under wraps, and with a pass-centric offense as though he has Brees or Rodgers under center throwing to Graham, Sproles, Nelson, and Jennings, week after week even if it falters?

People trying to create controversy with sound bites taken out of context is what passes for journalism for many media outlets these days. Perhaps it is an unfortunate side effect of the internet driven motivation to create something new 24/7.

 

The play calling is something that I am looking forward to this season. I am not sold on Chan as an offensive mastermind. He seemed reluctant to change his game plan as the injuries mounted and Fitz's play started to decline last season. Will he be more open to running the ball, now that he knows he has at least two stud running backs? Will he allow the running threat to set up play action and a few surprise plays? I hope so, but I am mentally preparing myself to be disappointed.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

40 runs per game with fred/cj/gadget plays might be a really good thing. o linemen generally like to run block a hell of a lot more than pass block and rbs generally need to get into a rhythm, so i'm good with this formula. plus, it should open up the play-action passing game.

 

A top offense in the NFL last year ran around 1000-1100 plays from scrimmage on offense. (The Bills ran 992).

 

Assuming the Bills get to run a few more plays this year 'cuz the D keeps handing the ball back to them until they get it right, let's say they run 1050 plays from scrimmage. That's about 65-66 plays per game.

 

So you guys are suggesting that we run about 62% of the time.

 

Two playoff teams that are notable for running more than they pass are the Texans last year and the 49ers. They run 52 and 50% of their plays, respectively - 34 and 31 runs per game, pass about 45% of the time or <30 pass per game.

Teams with top offenses (NO, NE, GB) run 25-27 plays per game - about 40% run, 56 - 59% pass.

 

Last year, the Bills were as pass-heavy as a top offense - 36 pass plays per game or 58%, 24 run plays per game, or 39%.

 

John Wawrow posted an analysis in the Gaughn Fitz Article thread that:

the Bills went 4-0 in games Fitzpatrick attempted 29 or fewer passes last year.

they went 2-10 in games where he had 30 or more attempts.

and the two games that he won with 30 or more attempts, were the back-to-back comebacks against Oakland and New England.

He concludes that our offense isn't designed for Fitz to pass that much. I think it's a correlation, not a causation; I think when we get behind, Chan moves away from the run too quickly/feels we MUST passpasspasspass to get back in it, even when that doesn't seem justified by 1) our differential between YPA passing and YPA running 2) the amount of time left in the game 3) the score we must overcome. IOW we pass that much because we're losing, instead of losing because we pass that much.

 

Anyway, I would like to see the Bills run more - about 6 more run plays per game, which would put us running about as much as the 49ers do albeit a lower percentage of the time. The real key is that we need to be making about 4 more offensive plays per game - 1050 over a season not 992, and passing more effectively when we do pass (higher completion percentage, fewer INTs). I don't think Fitz passing >30 times a game is a problem, it's failing to get 1st downs/get the ball back and moving away from the run too early that's the problem.

 

But running 40 plays per game? That's unheard of in the modern NFL. Doesn't mean it couldn't work I suppose, but it's radical.

[swnybillsfan]

yeah, i'm still thinking that with improved play on d and fewer turnovers from the offense, we could have a few more plays per game and i'd like to see about 40 per game between our running backs and gadget guys. also, you could throw screen passes into that 40, those are close to running plays.

[RevWarRifleman]

People trying to create controversy with sound bites taken out of context is what passes for journalism for many media outlets these days. Perhaps it is an unfortunate side effect of the internet driven motivation to create something new 24/7.

 

The play calling is something that I am looking forward to this season. I am not sold on Chan as an offensive mastermind. He seemed reluctant to change his game plan as the injuries mounted and Fitz's play started to decline last season. Will he be more open to running the ball, now that he knows he has at least two stud running backs? Will he allow the running threat to set up play action and a few surprise plays? I hope so, but I am mentally preparing myself to be disappointed.

 

+1

[jester43]

Happened into a strong example of how people's words get spun out of context by media trying to make a controversy.

 

First we have this "Inside the Bills" feature with Chris Brown interviewing Jim Kelly

 

Kelly had an interesting point about what he feels will help Fitz the most this coming season in making the Bills a true playoff contender. “As offensive players we always say your defense is your best friend and you go out and get a Mark Anderson from the Patriots, a Mario Williams from the Texans, you get hopefully Shawne Merriman healthy now, a couple of great draft picks the last couple of years, if this team stays healthy and this defense stays healthy then Ryan Fitzpatrick’s best asset will be a dominating defense that will shorten the field for him so he doesn’t feel like he’s carrying the whole burden of the Buffalo Bills, not just the team, but the whole city on his shoulders,” said Kelly.

 

“He knows he can’t do it himself. Last year was his first year, but he didn’t have OTAs to help him prepare with his teammates and really jell as a team. So this is really his first year with a full offseason and getting familiar with the offense and the players he has around him. He has to play better and I think he knows it. He doesn’t need me to tell him that. I’ll tell you what though I’m more excited about this year than any of the last 10 years at least. I know that.”

 

Okay, my take on this is Jim is excited about the possibility of an improved D and how it will help the O. As a QB, he knows what it's like to feel that you have to carry the whole weight and he knows it will help Fitz to feel he doesn't have to do that any more. He's also not giving Fitz a pass - he's saying there were extenuating circumstances of no training camp and bad D, but Fitz mistakes have to go down and his play has to go up. Still, it's an overall positive article about Fitz and the Bills.

 

Now this article picks up part of the quote and spins it into the headline "Jim Kelly says Ryan Fitzpatrick has to play better", adding the lead paragraph: "Former Buffalo Bills great Jim Kelly believes that quarterback Ryan Fitzpatrick must play better this season and believes the Bills improved defense will only help take some of the pressure off of him." and the tail " I completely agree that Fitzpatrick must play better this season. Or else the Bills won’t have a shot at competing for a playoff spot." which makes it sound as though Kelly was quoted as saying "Fitzpatrick must play better or else the Bills won't have a shot at competing for a playoff spot". (emphasis mine).

 

Now, do we all think Fitz must do better than 23 INTs in a 16 game season? Yes, we do. Do we think he needs to find the chemistry/rhythm/freedom from chest injuries/better OL/whatever it was that had him top 5 in the league for completions the first 5 weeks, rather than the completion percentage he had in the last 8 weeks? Yes, we do. Do we all also realize that Alex Smith, Joe Flacco, Andy Dalton, Tim Tebow, and TJ Yates all play on teams that went to the playoffs? In most cases, strong D and a strong running game took them there.

 

1. The spinning is interesting - taking a positive article which mostly focuses on the impact improved D can have on the offense and what the QB can do, and tosses in "he has to play better, he knows that, he doesn't need me to tell him that" as pretty much a throw-away line, and making it the focus as though Jim is dissing off Fitz - then adding in the part about not making the playoffs if Fitz doesn't play better and the D only taking off some of the pressure, stuff Jim didn't say.

 

2. IMO, the only thing Fitz absolutely HAS to do is cut down the mistakes, the INTs. Without that, he's as good or better a QB than 4 guys who went to the playoffs. Can he do it? The guys who led the league in INTs in 2009 and 2010 are generally recognized as very good or great QB and dialed way back on the mistake-ometer the following year. So it can be done.

 

3. Also IMO it's really about Chan - will Chan truly adapt his play calling to his personnel, or will he stay with a 1-back offense that kept either Spiller or Fredex under wraps, and with a pass-centric offense as though he has Brees or Rodgers under center throwing to Graham, Sproles, Nelson, and Jennings, week after week even if it falters?

 

 

YAAAAAAAAWWWWWWNNNNNNN......

 

 

 

wake me up when the season starts.

[BRAWNDO]

A top offense in the NFL last year ran around 1000-1100 plays from scrimmage on offense. (The Bills ran 992).

 

Assuming the Bills get to run a few more plays this year 'cuz the D keeps handing the ball back to them until they get it right, let's say they run 1050 plays from scrimmage. That's about 65-66 plays per game.

 

So you guys are suggesting that we run about 62% of the time.

 

Two playoff teams that are notable for running more than they pass are the Texans last year and the 49ers. They run 52 and 50% of their plays, respectively - 34 and 31 runs per game, pass about 45% of the time or <30 pass per game.

Teams with top offenses (NO, NE, GB) run 25-27 plays per game - about 40% run, 56 - 59% pass.

 

Last year, the Bills were as pass-heavy as a top offense - 36 pass plays per game or 58%, 24 run plays per game, or 39%.

 

John Wawrow posted an analysis in the Gaughn Fitz Article thread that:

the Bills went 4-0 in games Fitzpatrick attempted 29 or fewer passes last year.

they went 2-10 in games where he had 30 or more attempts.

and the two games that he won with 30 or more attempts, were the back-to-back comebacks against Oakland and New England.

He concludes that our offense isn't designed for Fitz to pass that much. I think it's a correlation, not a causation; I think when we get behind, Chan moves away from the run too quickly/feels we MUST passpasspasspass to get back in it, even when that doesn't seem justified by 1) our differential between YPA passing and YPA running 2) the amount of time left in the game 3) the score we must overcome. IOW we pass that much because we're losing, instead of losing because we pass that much.

 

Anyway, I would like to see the Bills run more - about 6 more run plays per game, which would put us running about as much as the 49ers do albeit a lower percentage of the time. The real key is that we need to be making about 4 more offensive plays per game - 1050 over a season not 992, and passing more effectively when we do pass (higher completion percentage, fewer INTs). I don't think Fitz passing >30 times a game is a problem, it's failing to get 1st downs/get the ball back and moving away from the run too early that's the problem.

 

But running 40 plays per game? That's unheard of in the modern NFL. Doesn't mean it couldn't work I suppose, but it's radical.

Interesting stats

[Captain Caveman]

I really think people need to have a better filter for what constitutes "the media".

[kota]

Actually, Jim Kelly was on Sirius NFL radio earlier this week with Tim Ryan and Solomon Wilcots. It started off with them asking how much Jim Kelly gets involved with team specifically Fitz. He flat out said "Fitz needs to play better and he knows that without me saying anything". It then turned into a conversation on how an inproved defense will make it so Fitz doesn't have to play from behind and take chances with the football which lead to alot of the INT's last year.

 

It was a good interview and JIm wasn't being mean at all. After the interview there was a NFL headline saying "Jim Kelly says Fitz needs to play better". He did say this but if you didn't listen to the interview i can see why people would take it the wrong way.

 

In the end it's just lazy reporting from the NFL guys by rehashing things from the radio show. IN this day and age i really wish they would just link the article to a audio file of the interview.

[caracara]

There is so much media, and everybody is competing like hell for traffic. Polarization, counterpoints and controversy is where the money is, especially during off season.