Bills have the 9th most runs in the NFL...there goes that argument...

[Alphadawg7]

you didn´t see that most of the 3 &out come from 3consecutive pass plays

 

This too ^^^^^

[Big Turk]

How many times has fitz rushed? I bet 4 to 5 times per game. Not bashing ya just saying he takes off and runs frequently as well.

 

Griffin has 105 rushes this year compared to Fitz's 38...

 

Take away the QB's rushing attempts and the Bills run the ball more than the Redskins with their RBs, although I am sure many of Griffin's runs are designed as a run/pass option

[thewildrabbit]

What you guys are missing is most games this year the Bills pass 30-40 times a game and run 15-25 times. Last week the Bills were ranked 7th,and are currently ranked 4th in the NFL in rushing yardage and could easily be first with the pair of super star RB's on this team.

 

This past week against the Jags the Bills finally gave Spiller and Jackson 42 touches while limiting Fitz to 17 attempts passing. The Bills won 34-18 without passing much.

 

The Bills have the talent in RB's and O line to be a run first team like the 49ers and Texans, instead they prefer to have the sub par QB try and throw throw throw to win the game

[Big Turk]

OK, here are the breakdowns:

 

Bills have the 9th most running attempts in the NFL

Bills have the 27th most passing attempts in the NFL

Bills have the 27th most total offensive plays from scrimmage in the NFL

Bills run the ball 8th most as a percentage of total offensive plays at 46.47% of all plays, with the Jets directly above them at 46.66%, so for all intents and purposes, they run the ball almost exactly the same percentage of the time(amounts to 6 carries difference over 12 games)

 

Here is the list of top running teams by percentage of total plays:

 

1) Seattle: 53.47% (Russell Wilson 66 carries)

2) Washington: 51.12% (Robert Griffin 105 carries)

3) San Fran: 50.83% (Kapernick/Smith 69 carries)

4) Kansas City: 48.88%

5) Houston: 48.82%

6) Chicago: 48.13%

7) NY Jets: 46.66%

8) Buffalo: 46.47% (Fitz 38 carries)

9) Carolina: 45.44% (Newton 95 carries)

10) New England: 45.41%

11) Minnesota: 44.98%(Peterson far and away the leagues leading rusher and they run the ball LESS than the Bills)

12) Miami: 44.93%

 

Least Running Teams in the NFL by percentage of plays:

 

1) Oakland: 33.25%

2) New Orleans: 33.97%

3) Detroit: 34.02%

4) Arizona: 34.57%

5) Dallas: 34.72%

6) Tennessee: 36.66%

7) Jacksonville: 37.03%

8) Atlanta: 37.55% (polar opposite of the other 11-1 team, Houston...Matt Ryan winging that ball all over the field)

9) Indianapolis: 38.04%

10) San Diego: 39.31%

11) Baltimore: 39.45% (its turning into the Flacco show not the Rice show in Baltimore)

12) Cleveland: 39.94%

 

Lets stop pretending the Bills don't run it and always throw...in fact they are one of the MORE lopsided teams in relation to run/pass percentage there is out there...have a feeling they would be even higher on this list if not for them having to throw virtually all game against the Jets and 49ers games because they were getting blown out...you want to talk about teams that don't run the ball? Look at all those teams that are under 40/60 run/pass ratio....

Edited December 7, 2012 by matter2003

[Alphadawg7]

OK, here are the breakdowns:

 

Bills have the 9th most running attempts in the NFL

Bills have the 27th most passing attempts in the NFL

Bills have the 27th most total offensive plays from scrimmage in the NFL

Bills run the ball 8th most as a percentage of total offensive plays at 46.47% of all plays, with the Jets directly above them at 46.66%, so for all intents and purposes, they run the ball almost exactly the same percentage of the time(amounts to 6 carries difference over 12 games)

 

Here is the list of top 10 running teams by percentage of total plays:

 

1) Seattle: 53.47% (Russell Wilson 66 carries)

2) Washington: 51.12% (Robert Griffin 105 carries)

3) San Fran: 50.83% (Kapernick/Smith 69 carries)

4) Kansas City: 48.88%

5) Houston: 48.82%

6) Chicago: 48.13%

7) NY Jets: 46.66%

8) Buffalo: 46.47%

9) Carolina: 45.44% (Newton 95 carries)

10) New England: 45.41%

 

Least Running Teams in the NFL by percentage of plays:

 

1) Oakland: 33.25%

2) New Orleans: 33.97%

3) Detroit: 34.02%

4) Arizona: 34.57%

5) Dallas: 34.72%

6) Tennessee: 36.66%

7) Jacksonville: 37.03%

8) Atlanta: 37.55%

9) Indianapolis: 38.04%

10) San Diego: 39.31%

 

Lets stop pretending the Bills don't run it and always throw...in fact they are one of the MORE lopsided teams in relation to run/pass percentage there is out there...have a feeling they would be even higher on this list if not for them having to throw virtually all game against the Jets and 49ers games because they were getting blown out...you want to talk about teams that don't run the ball? Look at all those teams that are under 40/60 run/pass ratio....

 

Ok, so let me see if I understand your stance. You are saying we run too much? You are saying we run just the right amount of times?

 

I mean, are you saying that you are not pulling your hair out when Chan abandons the run game in a close game and just throws 3 straight for a 3 and out? You are saying you happy with the pass to run selection and game management of Chan in terms of how he is using our running tandem? Because if not, what is your point. I dont ask to be a dick, I ask because I truly do not understand. What I see in the majoirty of the weeks is people going bonkers over how Chan does not run enough when the run game is all that is working. What I see is Chan throw on 3rd and 1 from 5 wide 20 yards down field for an incomplete pass or INT instead of running...what I see is Chan run or throw a screen every time its 3rd and long.

 

Seriously, the one thing I have never seen at any point on this board by any poster until today is someone say we run just enough or too much. Not once...but today in a thread someone decided to look at totals and now its a hot topic of how we run more than enough. Why because totals are flawed stats to skew a point, they actually have NO RELEVANT INFO to a week in and week out evaluation. But they know that, and thats why they focus on it.

 

Lets look at what REALLY has gone on shall we...below is the wins along with the division of pass and run and the outcome of the game. Note, that I included all rush attempts including Fitz, Smith, backups, reverses, FB, etc.

 

KC - 19 passes, 36 rushes - we won 35-17

CLE - 35 passes, 34 rushes - we won 24-14

AZ - 32 passes, 33 rushes - we won 19-16 (although this should have an asterisks as we lost this game like 5 times but luckily AZ lost it like 6 times)

MIA - 27 passes, 31 rushes - we won 19-14

JAX - 17 passes, 46 rushes - we won 34-18

 

Total 130 passes to 180 carries - pretty clear as we ran 58% of the time in our wins

 

See a pattern? In all of these games that we actually won, we either had basically a 50/50 spilt on run or pass, or we had a run dominant game. You will also note, that we won big in the games where we ran a lot more than passed and had narrow victories when we threw as much as we ran.

 

Now lets look at the losses

 

Jets - 32 passes, 26 carries - we lost 48-28 (and Spiller had 169 yards on just 14 carries...hmm maybe he should have touched the ball more).

NE - 39 passes, 27 carries - we lost 52 -28 (side note, Fitz threw 7 INTS and had a fumble over these first two games...go passing game).

SF - 26 passes, 19 carries - we lost 41-3

Tenn - 35 passes, 24 carries - we lost 35-34 (Fitz game ending INT)

Hou - 38 passes, 16 carries - we lost 21-9 (spiller avg 6.5 yard per carry but only got 6 carries the whole game and FJ only had 6)

NE - 40 passes, 28 carries - we lost 37-31

INDY - 33 passes, 23 carries - we lost 20-13 (spiller again huge game avg 7.6 per carry, but only gets 14 carries)

 

Total - 243 passes to 163 carries - pretty clear as we passed 60% of the time in our losses

 

Hmmm...I see a patter here, does anyone else? In all our losses we were pass heavy, in every single one. So when Chan decides to go all Fitzy and throw and abandon the run game, we lose. And its very lopsided to pass. When Chan decides to use his head and balance the attack to be 50/50 we grind out wins. When Chan decides to ride the run game, we win big. And in most of those games, the games were close and we did not have to throw constantly.

 

How clearer does this have to be for you people. Personally, I did not even have to look this info up to know this, but I did anyway. Thats because I watch the games and use my eyes. Anyone who thinks we run enough is just fooling themselves in a way to defend Ftiz again, and its getting ridiculous now. This data couldnt be any clearer.

 

Here is the best part...I included ALL carries, including rushes by Fitz, Smith, back up RB's. When you focus on just the carries Fred and Spiller get, the numbers get even worse and they are who should be touching the ball more.

 

Seriously, I dare someone to even attempt to justify not running MORE with that info. In our wins, basically a 60-40 run to pass ratio...in our losses, the opposite with a 60-40 pass to run ratio. Case closed...next please.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Alphadawg7

[buffalover4life]

It is possibly the best back field in football. I want them #1 in touches. I wish we ran San Fransisco's O. Pound the ball play good defense.

[mrags]

 

 

Ok, so let me see if I understand your stance. You are saying we run too much? You are saying we run just the right amount of times?

 

I mean, are you saying that you are not pulling your hair out when Chan abandons the run game in a close game and just throws 3 straight for a 3 and out? You are saying you happy with the pass to run selection and game management of Chan in terms of how he is using our running tandem? Because if not, what is your point. I dont ask to be a dick, I ask because I truly do not understand. What I see in the majoirty of the weeks is people going bonkers over how Chan does not run enough when the run game is all that is working. What I see is Chan throw on 3rd and 1 from 5 wide 20 yards down field for an incomplete pass or INT instead of running...what I see is Chan run or throw a screen every time its 3rd and long.

 

Seriously, the one thing I have never seen at any point on this board by any poster until today is someone say we run just enough or too much. Not once...but today in a thread someone decided to look at totals and now its a hot topic of how we run more than enough. Why because totals are flawed stats to skew a point, they actually have NO RELEVANT INFO to a week in and week out evaluation. But they know that, and thats why they focus on it.

 

Lets look at what REALLY has gone on shall we...below is the wins along with the division of pass and run and the outcome of the game. Note, that I included all rush attempts including Fitz, Smith, backups, reverses, FB, etc.

 

KC - 19 passes, 36 rushes - we won 35-17

CLE - 35 passes, 34 rushes - we won 24-14

AZ - 32 passes, 33 rushes - we won 19-16 (although this should have an asterisks as we lost this game like 5 times but luckily AZ lost it like 6 times)

MIA - 27 passes, 31 rushes - we won 19-14

JAX - 17 passes, 46 rushes - we won 34-18

 

Total 130 passes to 180 carries - pretty clear

 

See a pattern? In all of these games that we actually won, we either had basically a 50/50 spilt on run or pass, or we had a run dominant game. You will also note, that we won big in the games where we ran a lot more than passed and had narrow victories when we threw as much as we ran.

 

Now lets look at the losses

 

Jets - 32 passes, 26 carries - we lost 48-28 (and Spiller had 169 yards on just 14 carries...hmm maybe he should have touched the ball more).

NE - 39 passes, 27 carries - we lost 52 -28 (side note, Fitz threw 7 INTS and had a fumble over these first two games...go passing game).

SF - 26 passes, 19 carries - we lost 41-3

Tenn - 35 passes, 24 carries - we lost 35-34 (Fitz game ending INT)

Hou - 38 passes, 16 carries - we lost 21-9 (spiller avg 6.5 yard per carry but only got 6 carries the whole game and FJ only had 6)

NE - 40 passes, 28 carries - we lost 37-31

INDY - 33 passes, 23 carries - we lost 20-13 (spiller again huge game avg 7.6 per carry, but only gets 14 carries)

 

Total - 243 passes to 163 carries - pretty clear.

 

Hmmm...I see a patter here, does anyone else? In all our losses we were pass heavy, in every single one. So when Chan decides to go all Fitzy and throw and abandon the run game, we lose. And its very lopsided to pass. When Chan decides to use his head and balance the attack to be 50/50 we grind out wins. When Chan decides to ride the run game, we win big. And in most of those games, the games were close and we did not have to throw constantly.

 

How clearer does this have to be for you people. Personally, I did not even have to look this info up to know this, but I did anyway. Thats because I watch the games and use my eyes. Anyone who thinks we run enough is just fooling themselves in a way to defend Ftiz again, and its getting ridiculous now. This data couldnt be any clearer.

 

Here is the best part...I included ALL carries, including rushes by Fitz, Smith, back up RB's. When you focus on just the carries Fred and Spiller get, the numbers get even worse and they are who should be touching the ball more. Seriously, I dare someone to even attempt to justify not running MORE.

 

Case closed...next please.

You and I have our disagreements about Fitz and how bad/good/average he is. But I completely agree with you on this. And I'm chiming in here to make sure you understand my tale on the while Fitz thing. I don't think he's great. Never have. But I do believe he's serviceable and if Chan would balance It out more in obvious situations, Fitz and the team would have a better winning record and that's what I've been trying to point out this while time.

 

I never thought he should be our starting QB for years to come and if I had a choice I'd rather try Fitz with a new coach than Chan with a new QB for the very same reasons you posted here.

 

It's not even so much that Chan is pass happy. It's the situations he puts the offense in. Like you said, passing from an empty backfield, 5 WR set when it's 3rd and 2. Or choosing to pass a 2 yard screen when it's 3rd and 17.

 

Do I think Chan would do better with a better QB? Of course! That's a given. He'll, one could argue (which you have) that if Chan had an Andrew Luck or a RG3, we'd have one if the best QBs in the league and in prime playoff contention right now. That's not my concern, my concern is... If Chan finally does get his QB that he just creams over, what do you think happens to the running game then? You think he gets crazy with playcalls now??? Just imagine if he had a QB that he truly believed could make every throw. We'd be the run n shoot Oilers or worse. CJ and Freddy would be worthless in this team.

 

I think Chan is a good play maker. He just isn't the greatest at choosing which time to use each play.

 

Glad we agree in something though.

[buffalover4life]

Ok, so let me see if I understand your stance. You are saying we run too much? You are saying we run just the right amount of times?

 

I mean, are you saying that you are not pulling your hair out when Chan abandons the run game in a close game and just throws 3 straight for a 3 and out? You are saying you happy with the pass to run selection and game management of Chan in terms of how he is using our running tandem? Because if not, what is your point. I dont ask to be a dick, I ask because I truly do not understand. What I see in the majoirty of the weeks is people going bonkers over how Chan does not run enough when the run game is all that is working. What I see is Chan throw on 3rd and 1 from 5 wide 20 yards down field for an incomplete pass or INT instead of running...what I see is Chan run or throw a screen every time its 3rd and long.

 

Seriously, the one thing I have never seen at any point on this board by any poster until today is someone say we run just enough or too much. Not once...but today in a thread someone decided to look at totals and now its a hot topic of how we run more than enough. Why because totals are flawed stats to skew a point, they actually have NO RELEVANT INFO to a week in and week out evaluation. But they know that, and thats why they focus on it.

 

Lets look at what REALLY has gone on shall we...below is the wins along with the division of pass and run and the outcome of the game. Note, that I included all rush attempts including Fitz, Smith, backups, reverses, FB, etc.

 

KC - 19 passes, 36 rushes - we won 35-17

CLE - 35 passes, 34 rushes - we won 24-14

AZ - 32 passes, 33 rushes - we won 19-16 (although this should have an asterisks as we lost this game like 5 times but luckily AZ lost it like 6 times)

MIA - 27 passes, 31 rushes - we won 19-14

JAX - 17 passes, 46 rushes - we won 34-18

 

Total 130 passes to 180 carries - pretty clear

 

See a pattern? In all of these games that we actually won, we either had basically a 50/50 spilt on run or pass, or we had a run dominant game. You will also note, that we won big in the games where we ran a lot more than passed and had narrow victories when we threw as much as we ran.

 

Now lets look at the losses

 

Jets - 32 passes, 26 carries - we lost 48-28 (and Spiller had 169 yards on just 14 carries...hmm maybe he should have touched the ball more).

NE - 39 passes, 27 carries - we lost 52 -28 (side note, Fitz threw 7 INTS and had a fumble over these first two games...go passing game).

SF - 26 passes, 19 carries - we lost 41-3

Tenn - 35 passes, 24 carries - we lost 35-34 (Fitz game ending INT)

Hou - 38 passes, 16 carries - we lost 21-9 (spiller avg 6.5 yard per carry but only got 6 carries the whole game and FJ only had 6)

NE - 40 passes, 28 carries - we lost 37-31

INDY - 33 passes, 23 carries - we lost 20-13 (spiller again huge game avg 7.6 per carry, but only gets 14 carries)

 

Total - 243 passes to 163 carries - pretty clear.

 

Hmmm...I see a patter here, does anyone else? In all our losses we were pass heavy, in every single one. So when Chan decides to go all Fitzy and throw and abandon the run game, we lose. And its very lopsided to pass. When Chan decides to use his head and balance the attack to be 50/50 we grind out wins. When Chan decides to ride the run game, we win big. And in most of those games, the games were close and we did not have to throw constantly.

 

How clearer does this have to be for you people. Personally, I did not even have to look this info up to know this, but I did anyway. Thats because I watch the games and use my eyes. Anyone who thinks we run enough is just fooling themselves in a way to defend Ftiz again, and its getting ridiculous now. This data couldnt be any clearer.

 

Here is the best part...I included ALL carries, including rushes by Fitz, Smith, back up RB's. When you focus on just the carries Fred and Spiller get, the numbers get even worse and they are who should be touching the ball more.

 

Seriously, I dare someone to even attempt to justify not running MORE. Case closed...next please.

 

It also has to do with scoring first. chan plays with a run the ball mindset when he is winning. He losses patients with the run if the team is down.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

I would think the stats provided by the OP would be skewed a bit from last week when the Bills ran the ball 25 more times than they passed it.

[Alphadawg7]

It also has to do with scoring first. chan plays with a run the ball mindset when he is winning. He losses patients with the run if the team is down.

 

Yes he does, and even if we are down a single point or a single score. Its crazy

[Alphadawg7]

You and I have our disagreements about Fitz and how bad/good/average he is. But I completely agree with you on this. And I'm chiming in here to make sure you understand my tale on the while Fitz thing. I don't think he's great. Never have. But I do believe he's serviceable and if Chan would balance It out more in obvious situations, Fitz and the team would have a better winning record and that's what I've been trying to point out this while time.

 

I never thought he should be our starting QB for years to come and if I had a choice I'd rather try Fitz with a new coach than Chan with a new QB for the very same reasons you posted here.

 

It's not even so much that Chan is pass happy. It's the situations he puts the offense in. Like you said, passing from an empty backfield, 5 WR set when it's 3rd and 2. Or choosing to pass a 2 yard screen when it's 3rd and 17.

 

Do I think Chan would do better with a better QB? Of course! That's a given. He'll, one could argue (which you have) that if Chan had an Andrew Luck or a RG3, we'd have one if the best QBs in the league and in prime playoff contention right now. That's not my concern, my concern is... If Chan finally does get his QB that he just creams over, what do you think happens to the running game then? You think he gets crazy with playcalls now??? Just imagine if he had a QB that he truly believed could make every throw. We'd be the run n shoot Oilers or worse. CJ and Freddy would be worthless in this team.

 

I think Chan is a good play maker. He just isn't the greatest at choosing which time to use each play.

 

Glad we agree in something though.

 

In the chaos that is the losing ways of the Bills, lots of rooted in battles occur. I take nothing personal, and hope you dont either, no disagreements are meant to be personal, we are all frustrated especially after all the hype and high expectations coming into this season. I agree with your assessment of Fitz in this post and we are more on the same page than previous discussions would suggest. I would say though that while I do think Fitz is the best QB we have had since Bledsoe, I will follow that with the statement that isnt very meaningful given the people before him.

 

While I agree with most of what you wrote, I am not so sure Chan isnt already doing what you fear him doing with a rookie that doesnt pan out. Chan still puts the game on Fitzs shoulders more often than not, even when he doesnt have to, despite the fact that Fitz keeps coming up short. In fact, one could say that its Chan that keeps putting Fitz in position to fail rather than playing to the teams strengths.

 

I would love nothing more than to see Fitz become a solid QB for us, heck I like the guy and his guts. He was even amazing on "The League" in his guest spot this season (a show that you should watch if you do fantasy football...its pretty funny sitcom). However, 8 years of data suggest other wise. Can he become a game manager and lean on the run game? Well the data suggests its possible above, as we won when we pounded the rock or had a balanced attack. But, for what ever reason Chan more often than not still relies too much on Fitz and when he does we are winless.

 

Anyways, cheers to aligning on a topic and realizing we are not that much different on our view of Fitz than it would seem...here is a beer on me

Edited December 7, 2012 by Alphadawg7

[thewildrabbit]

To the OP, now go back and look at 2010 & 2011 where if the Bills got down on the scoreboard by as little as 3 points Gailey would shelf the run game and just pass pass pass.

 

 

Another think to consider is the ranking between the passing offense and rushing offense. The passing offense is currently ranked 26th out of 32. with Fitz as the 22nd ranked QB, right behind Miami rookie QB Tallywhacker.

 

The rushing offense is currently ranked 4th in the NFL. CJ Spiller is the 8th ranked RB and could easily be #1 if Gailey would commit to using him more then 15 touches a game.

 

As others have alluded to, it seems utterly moronic for this HC to keep putting the ball in the hands of the 22nd ranked QB instead of the 8th ranked RB. So yea, the Bills should run more!

[ganesh]

Bills have attempted the 9th most runs in the NFL this year with 342, or 46.4% of their total offensive plays. Factor in Washington's total is inflated by Griffin's runs and Bills likely are 8th in actual RB rushes.

 

Buffalo also has run a fairly low 736 offensive plays, which means their percentage of plays that are runs might be higher than 8th as well...

 

The argument the Bills don't run as much as other teams is completely false...we run more than most of them...

 

The problem is that 46.4% number. You would have wanted the ball in the hands of your best players more than 50% of the time. However, in our case, they got to run the ball only for 46.4% of time. If the Bills run above 50% of plays, they will be ranked much higher and their record would have been much better (They let those games to Titans, Colts and Patriots slip by).

[Big Turk]

I am no saying we run the ball too much or in the right situations. All I am saying is that the argument that gets made that the Bills don't run the ball is completely off base. They in fact DO run the ball more than most teams in the league. Could they run more? Yes. Should they run more? Again, I would say yes...or at least definitely once they get into the redzone as they have one of the highest YPC in the NFL inside the redzone.

 

Just so we are clear tho...3rd and 2 is a passing down and distance in the NFL these days for most teams, so its not like the Bills are the only ones doing this. I think the issue is we only watch the Bills most of the time and don't realize just how much somebody these other teams throw the ball---Baltimore and Atlanta really stick out to me as you would think they would have more runs as they are likely leading most of the games they are playing...

 

[truth on hold]

I agree our mix is fine. Problem is we dont have a good enough pass game to capitalize on our strong run game. Also wonderwhy when the line was healthy we werent better at getting needed short yards up the middle.

Edited December 7, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack

[Niagara Bill]

Thanks for the research. Good point.

no you make the bad point....if you have Aaron Rodgers , no running back and good receivers (potential HoF) you pass....if you have Fred and CJ and Fitz you run, because that is how you built the team.

[8-8 Forever?]

Bills have attempted the 9th most runs in the NFL this year with 342, or 46.4% of their total offensive plays. Factor in Washington's total is inflated by Griffin's runs and Bills likely are 8th in actual RB rushes.

 

Buffalo also has run a fairly low 736 offensive plays, which means their percentage of plays that are runs might be higher than 8th as well...

 

The argument the Bills don't run as much as other teams is completely false...we run more than most of them...

Good post. Most of the knuckleheads on this board want it to be 2/3 though... with a middle of the road defense we'd be 7 - 5 right now and right in the hunt. Can't blame the offense this year. Titans game was lost by the defense.. sorry, it was.

[JPS]

I find it ironic that their running percentage is roughly equal to their winning percentage, but I just woke up.

 

All these stat analysis discussions can't persuade me that this is either a talented or well coached team. I know what I see. Here's the only stat I'm interested in: How many good teams can the Bills beat? C'mon...you know the answer...

[BillsFan-4-Ever]

You must mix the pass in with the run game. Is it CJ's or Freds fault Fitz throws INT's at the WORST of times?

 

To counter - people brag of Fitz's passing yards (if not already nearly) exceeding that of Jim Kelly. What's that gotten him? A losing record in Buffalo,

[Webster Guy]

I was surprised at that stat. Interesting.

 

My biggest issue is when they call pass plays with the lead like in the TItans game. If we had handed off and pounded on our last possession we win that game.

 

At home, against a weak team in a year where we might have a shot at the playoffs, we choose to have our QB (who throws a lot of picks) throw the ball and we lose the game because of it.