cmjoyce113 Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 I am sorry all this talk about Fitzpatrick is fine with me. He played awful Sunday and last year. I get it. This team does NOT need a franchise qb to win games though. Not at all. It needs our coach to understand the way this team is built. Whether by design or accident this team has been built to run the damn ball. Last year we averaged 4.9 yards per carry on the year. Through Fitzpatrick, Spiller, Jackson, Donald Jones, Choice, Brad Smith and Thigpen we had 1915 Yards on 390 carries. On Sunday we had a 7.5 yards per carry average. After the preseason game against Detroit I brought this point up to my Dad about how great we looked on that first drive in the run game. On the first drive when all starters were in Spiller got 6 carries for 29 yards. Just over a 4.8 yard per carry average. Our offensive line is built big. We have an average (at best) QB with 2 what I would call above average running backs. I think this is a no brainer. Run the ball 40 times a game and this team goes a long ways. Not only will you score points and win games because it helps open the passing game for Fitzpatrick and receivers because teams will have to load the box. This will also help the defense because we can control the clock for 35 minutes a game on average with this approach I would guess. Am I totally wrong in my assessment of what we should be doing and how this offense is built to succeed?
dave mcbride Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 The problem with this is that you can't win in the NFL these days by running the ball. That's been the case for a few years. The entire league is built around the passing game - it's the only way you can consistently put up 25+ points. If the Bills went run heavy, it wouldn't help them win. They have to solve their passing game problems if they expect to have any chance to win.
cmjoyce113 Posted September 11, 2012 Author Posted September 11, 2012 The problem with this is that you can't win in the NFL these days by running the ball. That's been the case for a few years. The entire league is built around the passing game - it's the only way you can consistently put up 25+ points. If the Bills went run heavy, it wouldn't help them win. They have to solve their passing game problems if they expect to have any chance to win. I don't think it is as clear cut as you think. I have stats below from the playoff teams of the last 3 seasons and where in the NFL they ranked in overall rushing. It doesn't say if you run a lot you win, if you run a lot you lose. I think it just shows that you can make the playoffs leading the league rushing. 2011 Broncos - 1 Texans - 2 Ravens - 10 Steelers - 14 Bengals - 19 Patriots - 20 Saints- 6 49ers- 8 Falcons - 17 Packers - 27 Lions - 29 Giants - 32 2010 Chiefs - 1 Jets - 4 Pats - 9 Steelers - 11 Ravens - 14 Colts - 29 Eagles - 5 Falcons - 12 Bears - 22 Packers - 24 Saints - 28 Seahawks - 31 2009 Jets - 1 Ravens - 5 Bengals - 9 Pats - 12 Chargers - 31 Colts - 32 Saints - 6 Cowboys - 7 Vikings - 13 Packers - 14 Eagles - 22 Cardinals - 28 Upon further review breaking into conferences it looks like Rushing might play less of a role in success in the NFC than it does in the AFC. Just food for thought...
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 The problem with this is that you can't win in the NFL these days by running the ball. That's been the case for a few years. The entire league is built around the passing game - it's the only way you can consistently put up 25+ points. If the Bills went run heavy, it wouldn't help them win. They have to solve their passing game problems if they expect to have any chance to win. The NFL is a passing league because it is a copy cat league, not because you can't win by running and controlling the clock. The Bills are much better suited to run to pass rather than passing to run. We have two franchise runners, a mobile QB who play actions well, physical wideouts who block, a TE who sits down in space well, and a mauling offensive line.
Gray Beard Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 I truly believe losing Fred Jackson's services for a while will cause Chan to pass MORE, not Less. It pains me to think about it, but I am pretty sure that will be Chan's plan. He seems to love the pass, even with a mediocre QB and mediocre WRs.
playman Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 1st: chan likes to pass too much to give a run first approach serious consideration. 2nd: with a run first approach you absolutely need a QB who can take the top of a defense. fitz cant do that. but for sure id like to see a more balanced game plan
NoSaint Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 I truly believe losing Fred Jackson's services for a while will cause Chan to pass MORE, not Less. It pains me to think about it, but I am pretty sure that will be Chan's plan. He seems to love the pass, even with a mediocre QB and mediocre WRs. We are average in our splits. 30 out of 32 teams last year passed more than 50% of the time. Houston was about even, with only tebows broncos running substantially more. Without more talent at qb, and wr it's going to be a struggle no matter what we do. By spreading the field out we atleast create room to run, and higher percentage passing routes. Bunching things up will not fix our inconsistent qb play and lack of elite wrs. 1st: chan likes to pass too much to give a run first approach serious consideration. 2nd: with a run first approach you absolutely need a QB who can take the top of a defense. fitz cant do that. but for sure id like to see a more balanced game plan To point two, I agree. Currently we don't have speed outside or a big arm on our team. We have to make the field wide, not long. Unfortunately it's hard to succeed long term without doing both.
3rdand12 Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 The NFL is a passing league because it is a copy cat league, not because you can't win by running and controlling the clock. The Bills are much better suited to run to pass rather than passing to run. We have two franchise runners, a mobile QB who play actions well, physical wideouts who block, a TE who sits down in space well, and a mauling offensive line. This.Nix has built a very good offensive line under the radar a bit. Nasty with almost enough depth up and coming> we still retain a fullback who can move a linebacker and destroy a db. Lee Smith is no slouch, and caught a ball very well sunday. If it's a copy cat league someone has to start the trend! again, All i ask is we make better use of the strengths we have right now When we get some top notch receivers we should be sure to have "at least" a projected franchise rookie in camp.
BuffaloBillsMagic1 Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 other than don jones and SJ do we have any WRs left on this team?
MDH Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 This team doesn't even need to run more than they pass - they just need more balance. The weakest part of the O are the WRs and the QB yet somehow Gaily wants to put the ball up 36 times a game (last years att avg.) Sure, sometimes the team falls behind which pushes those numbers up but the disturbing trend is that the Bills consistently come out firing the ball around the field. There's no need for 2 TEs a FB and a RB - the spread formation is fine - just run the ball out of it more often.
NoSaint Posted September 11, 2012 Posted September 11, 2012 (edited) This team doesn't even need to run more than they pass - they just need more balance. The weakest part of the O are the WRs and the QB yet somehow Gaily wants to put the ball up 36 times a game (last years att avg.) Sure, sometimes the team falls behind which pushes those numbers up but the disturbing trend is that the Bills consistently come out firing the ball around the field. There's no need for 2 TEs a FB and a RB - the spread formation is fine - just run the ball out of it more often. Our split last week was 45% run - 55% pass placed us dead center in the league Last year we were 40% run - 60% passputting us top ten in pass percentage, but only 2% over the dead center of the league Balance is currently in the ballpark of 40-45% runs for the nfl and the last two years we were at 40 and 42, with yesterday at 45. We aren't far out of line. In fact for a team playing from behind its about where you'd expect. Edited September 11, 2012 by NoSaint
DrDawkinstein Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) Our split last week was 45% run - 55% pass placed us dead center in the league Last year we were 40% run - 60% passputting us top ten in pass percentage, but only 2% over the dead center of the league Balance is currently in the ballpark of 40-45% runs for the nfl and the last two years we were at 40 and 42, with yesterday at 45. We aren't far out of line. In fact for a team playing from behind its about where you'd expect. Excellent posts, as usual. However, I feel if we were to simply flip the numbers to 55-60% run, and 40-45% pass, we would have a shot against any team. Come out, let your OL take it to the defense, get into a rhythm, and dominate. No other excuses about route communications, or misreads. Just go forward. I know it's a stupid oversimplification, but football can be a simple sport, even in the NFL. JMHO Edited September 12, 2012 by DrDareustein
hamtenp Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 Chan brought back running back Johnny White to replace a wide receiver, David Nelson who is out for the season. Does that not tell us he plans to run the ball more? That is his plan, more running and less passing.
qdawg in philly Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) RUN THE DAM BALL!! Its a copy cat league, right? Well we should try to copy the niners! Alex smith is ass and we all know that, but he manages the game. Their offense has frank gore and vernon davis. Sure they just picked up moss and manningham, but look at last year. We just need our defense to come to the game and go for broke. I truly believe our defense will be fine. As for the O, chan ask to much of fitz in imho. He has this complex passing O with the best career back up in the league at the helms. Honestly fellas, chan needs to scale back with the responsibilities that he places on fitz. Allow him to just manage the game. Run and set up the play action. I actually think fitz runs the play action well. And if the niners aren't a good example of comparison, pls someone tell me why not? Edited September 12, 2012 by qdawg in philly
NoSaint Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 (edited) Excellent posts, as usual. However, I feel if we were to simply flip the numbers to 55-60% run, and 40-45% pass, we would have a shot against any team. Come out, let your OL take it to the defense, get into a rhythm, and dominate. No other excuses about route communications, or misreads. Just go forward. I know it's a stupid oversimplification, but football can be a simple sport, even in the NFL. JMHO I understand. Perspective around the league is that Denver ran 54% of the time last year, which is the highest since chan took the helm. The only other team to break 50-50 was Houston at 52% (I could see the argument that especially without schaub and Johnson the offense was like ours- meh passing game with good backs- but the D was much better which helps grind things out). The smash mouth 49ers were 3rd highest percentage at 49% rushing plays. Great defense, and leads again a real theme unless your qb is tebow running the option. I'm not saying your wrong, just trying to give some around the league perspective on the splits. Going 55-60% run would be put us firmly in the top 5 for the last decade, and we would have by far the worst defense of the group (I'm talking ravens and steelers as the baseline in that group). Additionally many of those are before opening the passing game up by protecting receivers. If it worked, we'd be a bit outside the norm. I agree with the op. RUN THE DAM BALL!! Its a copy cat league, right? Well we should try to copy the niners! Alex smith is ass and we all know that, but he manages the game. Their offense has frank gore and vernon davis. Sure they just picked up moss and manningham, but look at last year. We just need our defense to come to the game and go for broke. I truly believe our defense will be fine. As for the O, chan ask to much of fitz in imho. He has this complex passing O with the best career back up in the league at the helms. Honestly fellas, chan needs to scale back with the responsibilities that he places on fitz. Allow him to just manage the game. Run and set up the play action. I actually think fitz runs the play action well. And if the niners aren't a good example of comparison, pls someone tell me why not? The niners passed more than they ran and have a best in the league type defense. Also played with leads. A few things to keep in mind. Edited September 12, 2012 by NoSaint
K-9 Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 Chan brought back running back Johnny White to replace a wide receiver, David Nelson who is out for the season. Does that not tell us he plans to run the ball more? That is his plan, more running and less passing. I think Chan brought back Johnny White to replace Freddy and we'll have TJ Graham replace Nelson. GO BILLS!!!
qdawg in philly Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 I understand. Perspective around the league is that Denver ran 54% of the time last year, which is the highest since chan took the helm. The only other team to break 50-50 was Houston at 52% (I could see the argument that especially without schaub and Johnson the offense was like ours- meh passing game with good backs- but the D was much better which helps grind things out). The smash mouth 49ers were 3rd highest percentage at 49% rushing plays. Great defense, and leads again a real theme unless your qb is tebow running the option. I'm not saying your wrong, just trying to give some around the league perspective on the splits. Going 55-60% run would be put us firmly in the top 5 for the last decade, and we would have by far the worst defense of the group (I'm talking ravens and steelers as the baseline in that group). Additionally many of those are before opening the passing game up by protecting receivers. If it worked, we'd be a bit outside the norm. The niners passed more than they ran and have a best in the league type defense. Also played with leads. A few things to keep in mind. thanx NoSaint
San Jose Bills Fan Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 I have a numerous thoughts on this subject that have been expressed before and this is a good place to re-state them. You can quibble about run/pass percentages but then you'd be missing the point (as if there's some magic number out there). For nearly a year, there have been people on this board saying that the Bills should run the ball 3-4 more times a game. That point is based upon observation, not statistics. If you watch the games critically and anticipate plays or playcall pass or run in your own mind, you'll find that the Bills rely too heavily on the pass. But it's only 3-4 times a game which makes the difference between optimum playcalling and something less. People who claim Gailey is pass happy are right IMO but not by the margin that overreactionists believe. It's a matter of degree. As far as the dogma that the Bills can only run effectively out of a spread offense, I say bullspit for several reasons. Firstly does anyone even remember the Bills attempting to go to a run-heavy offense? No. So how can you draw this conclusion? Secondly, this offensive line is healthy for the first time in quite a while. They have been banged up for much of the previous two years. Thirdly not only is the O-line healthy but Cordy Glenn is a dominant run blocker so the left tackle play in the run game is MUCH IMPROVED. Glenn made the Steelers Brett Keisel his personal pushcart in the Bills-Steelers preseason game. He did the same against the Jets and if the Bills were smart, they'd run behind Glenn and Levitre like the Raiders used to run behind Shell and Upshaw. As far as people pointing to yards per carry in trying to explain what an effective running game is, yards per carry is actually somewhat irrelevant. The Jets ran the ball 36 times and passed 27 times against the Bills. The Jets "ONLY" averaged 3.3 yards per carry. This mediocre ground attack allowed the Jets to avoid any semblance of 3rd and longs, kept the Bills pass rushers honest, and allowed the Jets mediocre O-line to play aggressively. The emphasis on the run was a huge reason the Bills never generated a pass rush. The yards per carry was less important than the simple commitment to run the ball. Also as we all know, offenses that run the ball to keep their opponents honest tend to be very effective with play action. A team simply doesn't have to average 5 yards per carry for their run game to be a valuable asset. The mere fact of running the ball is its own reward. Buying into the contemporary belief that passing is the only way to victory will prove to be a false theory for all the NFL teams which pass too much and miss the playoffs. Why are the Patriots going to two tight ends? Has San Francisco's and Houston's run-heavy attacks made their quarterbacks more or less effective? Are the Green Bay Packers hurt by their inability to run the ball? When the Giants beat the Packers in the Super Bowl, they actually averaged less per carry than did the Patriots but they ran the ball 9 more times than did New England. It was their stronger commitment to running the ball that made a big difference in favor of the Giants. The last time the Patriots won a Super Bowl (in 2004) they had the ability to run the ball with Corey Dillon. A good offense doesn't need to lead the league in rushing but it sure helps them to actually make their opponents honor the run.
BuffOrange Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 The NFL is a passing league because it is a copy cat league, not because you can't win by running and controlling the clock. The Bills are much better suited to run to pass rather than passing to run. We have two franchise runners, a mobile QB who play actions well, physical wideouts who block, a TE who sits down in space well, and a mauling offensive line. Good points. Only thing I would question is the mauling OL. I mean, I think our OL is fine. But I'm not sure they're the 2003 Chiefs. The good rushing #'s we've put up have largely come out of the spread. Are they (and the RB's) suited for a physical, jumbo package, "I don't care if they know what's coming we're getting 4-5 yards"? I guess we don't know for sure because they haven't tried it but I sort of doubt it. I suppose it's worth a shot if Fitz doesn't improve drastically soon.
TakeYouToTasker Posted September 12, 2012 Posted September 12, 2012 Good points. Only thing I would question is the mauling OL. I mean, I think our OL is fine. But I'm not sure they're the 2003 Chiefs. The good rushing #'s we've put up have largely come out of the spread. Are they (and the RB's) suited for a physical, jumbo package, "I don't care if they know what's coming we're getting 4-5 yards"? I guess we don't know for sure because they haven't tried it but I sort of doubt it. I suppose it's worth a shot if Fitz doesn't improve drastically soon. More to the point, I believe this would improve Fitz drastically by playing to his strengths, and creating more match-up and formation mismatches by forcing defenses to put 8 men in the box.
Recommended Posts