Hackett not giving Manuel "easy throws" a little frustrating

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

 

Well, they sure aren't going to talk about Takeo Spikes, London Fletcher, Shawn Merriman, Travis Henry, the good ole days, Lawyer Milloy, etc.

 

We're in the present and these are the topics at hand. Though Gailey can be forgotten at this point I agree...

 

I guess my point is that this has been a long week. Every thread is an airing of grievances on the same points. At this point, I am just hoping we pull out a win on sunday for the sake of everyone's sanity.

[EasternOHBillsFan]

Jets were playing press man most of the day, and we could have given Manuel some easy wide open throws by using stack and bunch formations that would create natural picks leaving dudes wide open for a period of time...frustrating we didn't take advantage of that...

If you watch the video analysis of Manuel's key plays, HE is the one who doesn't take advantage of the wide open guys, and it isn't Hackett. He is not scanning the full field quickly to find them, and bad throws are made. Don't believe me? Check out TSW for the thread that has the link.

[Rockinon]

I just don't think its as simple as not giving him easy throws. The way the Jets D was working is that the hot read was often downfield along the sidelines. EJ was doing what he has learned so far. There were opportunities in the middle of the field. Something a veteran would pick up on and something EJ will pick up after studying some film. I'm not at all surprised by his struggles this early. What did you expect? For him to just light things up right out of the gate?

 

He still throws a nice ball. The guys around him also have some things to work on. Things rarely just fall into place perfectly. This is pretty much what I expected. Hopefully, everyone starts to get it. I think Hackett too, is smart enough to adjust as well. It's early. Who knows, they might start clicking tomorrow against the Ravens. Not holding my breath but I wouldn't be overly surprised. The talent is there.

[Coach Tuesday]

Thank you so much for your concerted effort to turn an interesting football thread into a complain about the board thread.

Maybe instead of ragging on other Bills fans, you'd get better results by actually adding to the discussion instead of crapping on threads and then complaining about the quality of the forum.

 

You're very inconsistent and selective with your grumpiness Simon. How about the half-dozen "The Problem With Bills Fans" or "This Board Is Unreadable" threads that have popped up this week alone? I'm not going to defend myself as a poster. There has been a concerted effort around here this week to blast anyone who dares criticize any aspect of the team and it is tiresome.

[Big Turk]

 

What is people's fascination with Gailey. His offense was figured out about a third of the way through the season. Yeah he used screens well, so what. How does every forget how stagnant and terrible our offense was once teams started pressing our WR's and taking away the quick hitters, which were the only ones FItz could do consistently? The offense was absolutely stopped in its tracks once teams got physical with our WR's.

 

Only because the QB was the limiting factor...would have loved to see EJ in that offense...

[Pirate Angel]

Jets were playing press man most of the day, and we could have given Manuel some easy wide open throws by using stack and bunch formations that would create natural picks leaving dudes wide open for a period of time...frustrating we didn't take advantage of that...

 

For instance lining up two players close together and then a third off set to their left(on the right side of the field) you could easily have those two players run hard inside slants and have the third inside guy loop around them to the flat or run a flat wheel route, leaving his defender to fight through 4 players to try and get to him...

 

Something Gailey was a mastermind at using...Hackett would be wise to look at Gailey's play designs for getting people wide open cause he was brilliant at it...

 

So frustrating to watch the Denver-Oakland game and see exactly that going on even tho Peyton Manning hardly needs it...but time after time they ran bunch/picks to get the underneath throws wide open...Patriots often use this as well very successfully and at times illegally

 

Easy throws and completions are never a bad thing Nathaniel

Gailey won 6 games a year ....lets not use mastermind and genius or even brilliant to describe him. His offenses looked horrendous against good defenses. He was stubborn as a mule with is personnel, thought Fitz was a franchise qb and gave his players turns like kids on a playground.

[Big Turk]

Hey, I'm not saying Hackett doesn't need some time, but with a rookie QB wouldn't it make sense to give him a handful of easy completions and first downs at least a few times a game?

 

I mean if Brady and Manning run offenses give them easy throws, wouldn't you think a rookie QB would like the same options?

 

If the WRs are having problems beating press man at the LOS or they are blitzing hard, picks/rubs out of bunch formations will create wide open receivers to throw to..

 

I don't think I would continue banging my head into the wall by running virtually the same plays against it when alternative options would likely produce a much better result

[Coach Tuesday]

Hackett's route combinations are also extremely unsophisticated (including as compared to Gailey's). There were many, many plays (not just against the blitz) where the outside WRs simply ran streaks, and others where all three or four WRs ran curls or squares from the same distance (about 8-10 yards downfield). Very few crosses and, as you said, almost no bunches or motions designed to disrupt the press.

Edited September 28, 2013 by Coach Tuesday

[Big Turk]

Gailey won 6 games a year ....lets not use mastermind and genius or even brilliant to describe him. His offenses looked horrendous against good defenses. He was stubborn as a mule with is personnel, thought Fitz was a franchise qb and gave his players turns like kids on a playground.

 

His offense was limited by his QB inability to throw more than 15 yards downfield...

 

Would have loved to see what it could have been with a QB like EJ

[Simon]

Hackett's route combinations are also extremely unsophisticated (including as compared to Gailey's). There were many, many plays (not just against the blitz) where the outside WRs simply ran streaks, and others where all three or four WRs ran curls or squares from the same distance (about 8-10 yards downfield). Very few crosses and, as you said, almost no bunches or motions designed to disrupt the press.

The lack of effective route combinations was one of my most regular complaints when DickJ was coaching this team.

It's again become an issue for the Bills, particularly between the 20's. They'll run people off in the redzone to try and create scoring plays, but it's like they have a limited number of available options and they feel they need to save them for when they get closer to the goalline.

I think it's time for Hackett to make his way to page 3 of the playbook; not just for short-term effectiveness, but for longer term improvement as well.

[ko12010]

Only because the QB was the limiting factor...would have loved to see EJ in that offense...

I disagree. The QB has nothing to do with WR's who couldn't break DB's jamming them at the LOS. I'm not saying Gailey didn't do anything right offensively, he definitely did. But I think people need to make a concerted effort to separate themselves from what each regime did. Hackett might have a completely different philosophy. We need to stop comparing him to Gailey. Hackett may have different ideas on screens and rb draws, etc. Give him some more games to show if he is capable of adjusting. 3 games is nowhere near enough. It's ludicrous. And for the people who say with complete conviction that Hackett can't cut it in the NFL after THREE games, I say, take a deep breath and maybe try meditation or a yoga class to get rid of that anger that's making them so short-sighted. Yes it's been 13 years, more than likely 14 without playoffs. But 13 of those years won't be Marrone and co.'s fault! Stop blaming them for the ineptitude of the other regime's.

[Coach Tuesday]

I disagree. The QB has nothing to do with WR's who couldn't break DB's jamming them at the LOS. I'm not saying Gailey didn't do anything right offensively, he definitely did. But I think people need to make a concerted effort to separate themselves from what each regime did. Hackett might have a completely different philosophy. We need to stop comparing him to Gailey. Hackett may have different ideas on screens and rb draws, etc. Give him some more games to show if he is capable of adjusting. 3 games is nowhere near enough. It's ludicrous. And for the people who say with complete conviction that Hackett can't cut it in the NFL after THREE games, I say, take a deep breath and maybe try meditation or a yoga class to get rid of that anger that's making them so short-sighted. Yes it's been 13 years, more than likely 14 without playoffs. But 13 of those years won't be Marrone and co.'s fault! Stop blaming them for the ineptitude of the other regime's.

 

It's not just that. What happened in the Jets game was not only that the Jets played tight man coverage, but also that their CBs seemed to know the routes that were going to be run. They sat on the routes completely. Rex is no idiot - he had two games and some preseason tape and could see for himself that there were limited routes out of limited formations in Hackett's offense, and he got his guys ready to anticipate those routes.

 

It shouldn't be that easy in the NFL. It really shouldn't. You can get away with simplicity in college but not in the NFL, especially not in this division.

[Big Turk]

 

I disagree. The QB has nothing to do with WR's who couldn't break DB's jamming them at the LOS. I'm not saying Gailey didn't do anything right offensively, he definitely did. But I think people need to make a concerted effort to separate themselves from what each regime did. Hackett might have a completely different philosophy. We need to stop comparing him to Gailey. Hackett may have different ideas on screens and rb draws, etc. Give him some more games to show if he is capable of adjusting. 3 games is nowhere near enough. It's ludicrous. And for the people who say with complete conviction that Hackett can't cut it in the NFL after THREE games, I say, take a deep breath and maybe try meditation or a yoga class to get rid of that anger that's making them so short-sighted. Yes it's been 13 years, more than likely 14 without playoffs. But 13 of those years won't be Marrone and co.'s fault! Stop blaming them for the ineptitude of the other regime's.

 

Stevie virtually never is able to be jammed effectively at the line due to his quickness

[Dan]

What is people's fascination with Gailey. His offense was figured out about a third of the way through the season. Yeah he used screens well, so what. How does every forget how stagnant and terrible our offense was once teams started pressing our WR's and taking away the quick hitters, which were the only ones FItz could do consistently? The offense was absolutely stopped in its tracks once teams got physical with our WR's.

 

Why does it have to be either or? There were some good things in Gailey's offense. Why not try to incorporate some of them into the new offense? Stack formations, screens, running from 4WR sets are all things Gailey did to put his players in a position to win. And they're not bad ideas at all. Continuing to run Spiller into the teeth of a stout defensive line and going no where is a bad idea.

 

Unless...

I agree with all of this Bill; if we're looking at it from the perspective of the only goal is to win football games This Year.

But I don't think the Bills are playing for just This Year. I think they recognize that they're not going to challenge for the division, or even a playoff spot this year, so coaching guys up and building a good foundation becomes one of the primary goals, and if you can happen to win while doing it, then great.

I don't like some of the things I've seen either, but there's a learning process going on here, and if teaching is as important to them as winning right now, I can sort of understand that.

I was wondering if I was the only one to think this way. It almost seems at times that they're workingon things for the future... knowing they may not be successful now. The no huddle, for ex, yeah it's not clicking just yet, but if they want to be good at it in 1 or 2 years, then you stick with it now and take your lumps. Same with some of the running plays. It's kinda like they're trying to build an identity, even though they know they're not there yet.

 

I'm not yet sure if its a good approach or not.

[ko12010]

Stevie virtually never is able to be jammed effectively at the line due to his quickness

Ok, well where was he when we lost to San Fran 45-3? Where was he in the first half of the laugher opener against the Jets? How about the 52-28 loss to the Pats? Or the 21-9 loss to the Texans? 12 points against the Rams at home. 50-17 loss to the Seahawks. I agree that Fitz limited what Gailey could do, but Gailey didn't adjust very well to physical blitzing D's. Against good defense's our offense was stifled thoroughly. EVERY TIME. That's why we only beat winning teams like 2 or 3 times when he was here. I love Stevie, and think he's great, but let's say Stevie never allowed himself to be jammed. So what--the D's can still key on him throughout his whole route while the other WR's are still trying to break free from physical man coverage. Gailey didn't adjust to this. Could've used more motion, maybe more bunch formations. Either way, he was far from an offensive genius/guru. And if Hackett needs to improve his offensive philosophy, there are about 100 coaches I'd want him to study before Gailey.

[3rdand12]

read all of above.

One thing we learned , and i relearned by re-watching moments in the game is this. Manuel fell apart under Ryans pressure. He coached to defeat/stop spiller and then EJ. Well done Rex !

Now Marrone and the rst of us? know Manuel is a project right. Some dont seem to accept he isnt that good. Yet. and that maybe the Hackett was the reason we had "some" success the first two games. Guys its going to be a long season and i expect it will improve slowly but steadily. Sure they are making coaching errors . I am surpised that anyone thought they wouldn't .

lets see how we play the Ravens . and then the Browns et al and give these new guys a chance.

That being said Gailey was a master of making the best of his limitations and Nate should give him a call .

may i add that this is a very young team both coaches and players. I am surpised we are staying in games much less winning.

Go Bills

edit. Simon, building a foundation is how i perceive this season so far. Nathaniel Hackett has as much knowledge as the best of them and i suspect he is holdin back if you look into his history.

Edited September 28, 2013 by 3rdand12

[Coach Tuesday]

Ok, well where was he when we lost to San Fran 45-3? Where was he in the first half of the laugher opener against the Jets? How about the 52-28 loss to the Pats? Or the 21-9 loss to the Texans? 12 points against the Rams at home. 50-17 loss to the Seahawks. I agree that Fitz limited what Gailey could do, but Gailey didn't adjust very well to physical blitzing D's. Against good defense's our offense was stifled thoroughly. EVERY TIME. That's why we only beat winning teams like 2 or 3 times when he was here. I love Stevie, and think he's great, but let's say Stevie never allowed himself to be jammed. So what--the D's can still key on him throughout his whole route while the other WR's are still trying to break free from physical man coverage. Gailey didn't adjust to this. Could've used more motion, maybe more bunch formations. Either way, he was far from an offensive genius/guru. And if Hackett needs to improve his offensive philosophy, there are about 100 coaches I'd want him to study before Gailey.

 

Gailey came damn close to beating Baltimore and Pittsburgh, and put up plenty of yards and points against those defenses.

[ko12010]

Why does it have to be either or? There were some good things in Gailey's offense. Why not try to incorporate some of them into the new offense? Stack formations, screens, running from 4WR sets are all things Gailey did to put his players in a position to win. And they're not bad ideas at all. Continuing to run Spiller into the teeth of a stout defensive line and going no where is a bad idea.

 

Unless...

 

I was wondering if I was the only one to think this way. It almost seems at times that they're workingon things for the future... knowing they may not be successful now. The no huddle, for ex, yeah it's not clicking just yet, but if they want to be good at it in 1 or 2 years, then you stick with it now and take your lumps. Same with some of the running plays. It's kinda like they're trying to build an identity, even though they know they're not there yet.

 

I'm not yet sure if its a good approach or not.

Again, WHY Gailey? There are hundreds of coaches Hackett could study to improve his own playcalling/philosophy who are/were much, much better than Gailey. Gailey was familiar with some of the personnel. Wow. Big deal. Why not study a true offensive genius instead of a mediocre head coach / average to slightly above average OC.

 

Gailey came damn close to beating Baltimore and Pittsburgh, and put up plenty of yards and points against those defenses.

You can cherry pick a few choice games from any regime / HC. But the majority of the time we were thoroughly dominated by good/great teams.

[Coach Tuesday]

Again, WHY Gailey? There are hundreds of coaches Hackett could study to improve his own playcalling/philosophy who are/were much, much better than Gailey. Gailey was familiar with some of the personnel. Wow. Big deal. Why not study a true offensive genius instead of a mediocre head coach / average to slightly above average OC.

 

 

You can cherry pick a few choice games from any regime / HC. But the majority of the time we were thoroughly dominated by good/great teams.

 

Cherry pick? You put "EVERY TIME" in all caps. You left yourself open to that one bud.

[GG]

 

+1...Plus Gailey got THREE years to right this ship...Marrone and Hackett are being judged by their performance in THREE GAMES!!

 

But this is the crux of this team, they blow it up to start over every three years instead of trying to fix what was wrong. Sad that they fixed the defense, only to field a jv offense again. Welcome back AVP.

 

Ps - Gailey was a darn good o coordinator and it's ridiculous to think otherwise.

Edited September 28, 2013 by GG