The Bills are doing an excellent job in Free Agency

[1B4IDie]

 

That's only half an analysis. Do the other half.

 

Hughes looked good entirely because of the system that we ran, which overemphasized rushing the passer at the expense of pretty much everything else.

 

Don't agree? Then how come our record didn't change? How come we allowed 3 more passing TDs despite all that pass-rush? How come our passsing yards-per-game were not significantly better than last those from the season prior? How come teams with the most pedestrian RBs, only one among the top-15 rushers in the league, and only one that rushed for over 1,000 yards, all had a tremendousy easy time rushing against us to help their teams win games?

 

You're going to see that overemphasis on the pass-rush diminish significantly this season. When it does, we'll likely see those lofty sack numbers decrease. That's not to say that the D will be worse because maybe just maybe Schwartz understands that it's not just sacks that define a D.

 

If Hughes had not had 10 sacks this past season, you wouldn't have said he was any good. I don't know how we can claim that the D was good given what they allowed to a bunch of bottom tier starting RBs.

 

You can like what the Bills have done all you want, but your and my opinions don't mean much. I really think you're going to see the D revert back to what it's been, particularly now that we've proven, as if there weren't enough data points from other teams out there already, namely Minnesota in recent years, that paint a clear picture that you need more than just sacks to win games from a defensive standpoint.

 

In fact, some of the teams against which we generated the most sacks still have well above average offensive days against us, largely due to their passing games. See the NO and ATL games as to prominent examples.

 

Meanwhile, the turd floating in the coffee cup that no one seems to be able to acknowledge is the ease of the offensive slate of teams that we faced this past season, starting with NE. We'll never ever see as marginal an offense in NE for as long as Brady's their QB as we did this past season.

 

Contrary to popular opinion here, the strength of offensive teams really does make a difference. Again, witness how well both Atlanta and New Orleans played against us, particularly in their passing games, despite us having hung 10 sacks on them combined.

 

All that "pass pressure" and yet not a single INT and bookoo passing yards and ridiculous completion percentages, not to mention 6 passing TDs and 66 offensive points in those two games.

 

At some point you've absolutely gotta reconcile that, you can't just cite the sacks and say "we've improved."

 

In those two games alone, we had 10 sacks, BUT, we also allowed 228 rushing yards (114 avg.), 54 of 81 (67%), 6 TDs passing, 643 passing yards (321 avg.), and 809 total net yards?

 

Did those sacks really help? I don't see how? And what, if we hadn't gotten them, what, they'd have logged another 2 or 3 hundred yards and even more points?

 

Anyway, you only think that Hughes is better than he is because of sack numbers. But either way, you cannot use a single example of how one fair-to-mediocre player previously, that may or may not have improved after raw sack numbers, is a predictor for more of the same, you know that.

 

 

 

Yeah, it worked out great, we improved by exactly 0 wins against a very easy schedule of offensive teams, that just oh by the way, we likely won't have this season.

 

 

 

"A lot of talent" is relative, isn't it. It can be argued that most or all teams have "a lot of talent." It's how we compare to other teams.

 

We have many glaring holes though John, you know that. Depth is necessary, but only once you've got a solid starting 22, which we are far from having.

 

We still lack a real play-making WR. SJ and Woods are good, but hardly, thus far, top-tier WRs.

 

We haven't had an impact TE since Polian's days.

 

With FJ having one foot out the door, Spiller is hardly a 3-down RB meaning we don't have an impact starting RB either.

 

We have depth caliber play at at least one OL spot, only above average in two others.

 

We now have two starting caliber LBs and still need a third and then still more depth.

 

Who's starting at FS? How can anyone say that this player will be even mediocre much less better right now?

 

Aaron Williams excelled in last season's D, but how will the otherwise disappointing player play this season w/ Byrd gone in a defense that's gotta be more well-rounded with more responsibility befalling him? I don't have high hopes.

 

As to the DL, sure, they logged bookoo sacks, which netted us nothing, but they allowed teams with even the most pedestrian rushing games to make mediocre RBs look like top-10 RBs. Is/was that a good thing? I don't see how.

 

We don't have as much talent as you may think, particularly starting, and when contrasted with the other divisional teams, less.

 

 

 

One of the most well reasoned and thought out, and best, posts that I've seen in a long-time!

 

Major props for a very concise well-thought out analysis, not to mention a rare one in discussions of this nature.

 

To summarize.

 

1.) Sacks are not the only measurement of a good defense.

2.) Sacks are not the only measurement of a good player.

3.) In 2013 the Buffalo Bills couldn't step the run well.

3.) In 2012 and 2013 the Buffalo Bills were 6-10

 

Groundbreaking thoughts.

 

What the hell does any of that have to with Brandon Spikes, Anthony Dixon, Scott Chandler, Chris Williams, Corey Graham, Keith Rivers, Mike Caussin and Dan Carpenter?

[metzelaars_lives]

Let's start with last years "team friendly" acquisitions. Manny Lawson, Alan Branch and Jerry Hughes. All better suited for their roles in a 3-4 and all were helped significantly by the unpredictable nature of the defense. Lawson is being talked about as a DE? He was a bust as a pass rusher. He is an edge setting 3-4 OLB whose best chance at the QB is an OL out of position defending unexpected pressure. Branch can't rush the passer and he isn't a true NT. You don't win matchups with him in a 4-3. Jerry Hughes was incredibly efficent as the Bills pass rushing replacement for Lawson. He will be marginalized playing wide in a 4-3 and if he is out wide the running lanes on either side are huge. Kiko is good but if anyone thinks lining him up behind Hughes is doing him a favor they are incorrect.

 

Next prime example is Alex Carrington. This guy is going to sign a dirt cheap deal on the open market. The team spent years developing this guy and his best fit by far is 3-4 DE and now he is being allowed to walk when he is looking at a dirt cheap contract? Why? Probably because he is a complete NON-fit in a 4-3 which Schwartz is planning to use.

 

There are a number of other players in the secondary as well who played above expectations under Pettine and it remains to be seen what happens to them. What happens when Leodis, Robey and Gilmore are asked to pass defend for another second because the pass rush is muted in an attempt to stuff the run? Or when Schwartz runs his wide nine and gives opposing QB's a "room with a view" from the pocket. Wide nine = wide passing lanes. Brady's nightmare is a solid wall around him and long arms blocking his throwing lanes.

 

But of course, we aren't changing to Schwartz longstanding non-blitzing 4-3. Right. I'd like to believe the D isn't changing much but then there is the whole matter of the Bills announcing that Rivers and Kiko are the OLB's and Spikes is the MLB. How many LB's is that? That's what I thought. If your base is 3 LB's and none of them can rush the QB then you aren't a 3-4. But if Schwartz is smart enough to not blow the progress this team has made on D....that's great. But I am USED to hearing the Bills tell us what we want to hear(against simple logic quite often) and then doing something different, predictable and unsuccessful. By the time you actually see the crap product on the field 7-8 months later you have forgotten that you were expecting better. It's called letting you down softly. Happens A LOT in Buffalo.

Well written post, no doubt about it. I think, however, that this is a classic example of over-dramatizing the effects that scheme has on productivity. Several years ago, the Ravens drafted Terrence Cody, a classic 3-4 NT if there ever was one. Well, they already had Haloti Ngata at NT so when Cody showed he could play, they made room for him and put him at DE. It's what the Ravens and Steelers have been doing forever: you put good football players on the field, it doesn't matter if it's a 3-4, 4-3, whatever. At the end of the day, 5 of the 7 starters on the Bills' front 7 are Brandon Spikes, Mario Williams, Marcell Dareus, Kyle Williams and Kiko Alonso. They are going to be good, don't worry. Not to mention, and here is the most important point of all: THEY RAN A 4-3 LAST YEAR TOO. So to suggest that Manny Lawson, who, by any account, had an excellent season last year, is going to be running around yelling, "what do I do, I forgot how to play football" because we have a new defensive coordinator, is preposterous. All that being said, I would like to think that Schwartz would come in and say, "hey you guys got a lot of sacks last year, what worked for you?" Edited March 30, 2014 by metzelaars_lives

[Dean Cain]

I'm just looking forward to us not yielding 200 yard running games next year. You do that by controlling the clock on offense & having the personnel on defense. Drafting a true run stuffer NT would be a lift. Kyle Williams could shift to a more nickel defense & 3rd down pass rusher, while the NT could team up with Spikes on 1st & 2nd down, and 3rd & 4th and shorts to form a solid anti-run package. If the Bills do end up trading up, I can only see this being their favorite offensive tackle. I don't see us trading up for a defender. Marrone seems to put an emphasis on OL play & size, and Clowney & Mack are not necessarily the big body guys that Marrone covets.

[Maury Ballstein]

Just listened to bill barnwell and robert mays nfl podcast (mays is a bears fan)

 

They laughed in amazement that some team paid Chris Williams and view him the same way we all have viewed Colin brown.

 

They also gave major kudos to bills fans and are against a new buyer moving the squad.

Edited April 25, 2014 by Ryan L Billz

[ALF]

C. Williams is a expensive gamble, we need to get at least 2 good OL players in the draft and try to get lucky after other teams cut down.

 

"Reportedly last season Williams ranked as the lowest-rated player on the Rams roster and got graded at 74th out of 81 qualifying guards in the league. The guard got drafted with the 14th overall pick by the Chicago Bears in 2008 and never lived up to expectations. As a result got cut midway through the 2012 season."

 

http://theinscribermag.com/analyzing-bills-signing-chris-williams/

Edited April 25, 2014 by ALF

[GunnerBill]

Williams is a reclamation project. I said earlier in the thread the investing in guys he rated coming out of college who maybe havne't performed in the NFL as expect is something I see as a Whaley trait. They still believe that the guy that was so highly rated coming out is still in there somewhere and they believe in Marrone's ability to coach it out. I think it's a move that has a huge upside, but a pretty low floor too.

[Doc]

I wish someone had asked Marrone or Whaley about what he saw in Chris Williams. Hopefully he turns out like Urbik did.

[Ronin]

To summarize.

 

1.) Sacks are not the only measurement of a good defense.

2.) Sacks are not the only measurement of a good player.

3.) In 2013 the Buffalo Bills couldn't step the run well.

3.) In 2012 and 2013 the Buffalo Bills were 6-10

 

Groundbreaking thoughts.

 

What the hell does any of that have to with Brandon Spikes, Anthony Dixon, Scott Chandler, Chris Williams, Corey Graham, Keith Rivers, Mike Caussin and Dan Carpenter?

 

Not sure what your point was/is.

 

Spikes is a one-dimensional MLB as we will see this season. He's an asset vs. the run but he's equally a liability vs. the pass. In a league whereby more plays, by about then again 50% or so, plays are passing plays, we'll see how that works out for us.

 

Chandler and Corey Graham are so-so starters, everyone else is a depth caliber player on that short list.

 

Again, not sure what your point was. Mine was very simply that the team broke the bank and poured all but the sum total of its resources last season into the pass rush, which was highly successful, but the net result was the same, which the more astute NFL fans, observors, media, and analysts knew already, and the rest of the team suffered as a result, as in regressed for the most part.

 

Not to mention that at the end of the day the team allowed more scores despite that bolstered pass rush.

 

Meanwhile, fans and media look at isolated stats, aka "sacks," et. al., and for some unbeknownst and similar reasons as per above, come to the erroneous conclusions that players like A. Williams, McKelvin (who's sucked as a CB for years), Hughes, Searcy, and Lawson, and to a lesser extent Mario, are better than they actually are.

 

Buffalonians are so starving for a good team that they overlook that stuff perennially and utterly fail to be able to assess the new team going forward.

 

McKelvin is a classic example, if he were worth the proverbial ****, he'd have proven that prior to last season. He's failed miserably as anything but a nickel back at best, even there he's hardly among the better 3rd CBs in the league.

[LB3]

 

McKelvin is a classic example, if he were worth the proverbial ****, he'd have proven that prior to last season. He's failed miserably as anything but a nickel back at best, even there he's hardly among the better 3rd CBs in the league.

 

What a ridiculous statement. Thanks for the laugh.

[Doc]

 

 

Not sure what your point was/is.

 

Spikes is a one-dimensional MLB as we will see this season. He's an asset vs. the run but he's equally a liability vs. the pass. In a league whereby more plays, by about then again 50% or so, plays are passing plays, we'll see how that works out for us.

 

Chandler and Corey Graham are so-so starters, everyone else is a depth caliber player on that short list.

 

Again, not sure what your point was. Mine was very simply that the team broke the bank and poured all but the sum total of its resources last season into the pass rush, which was highly successful, but the net result was the same, which the more astute NFL fans, observors, media, and analysts knew already, and the rest of the team suffered as a result, as in regressed for the most part.

 

Not to mention that at the end of the day the team allowed more scores despite that bolstered pass rush.

 

Meanwhile, fans and media look at isolated stats, aka "sacks," et. al., and for some unbeknownst and similar reasons as per above, come to the erroneous conclusions that players like A. Williams, McKelvin (who's sucked as a CB for years), Hughes, Searcy, and Lawson, and to a lesser extent Mario, are better than they actually are.

 

Buffalonians are so starving for a good team that they overlook that stuff perennially and utterly fail to be able to assess the new team going forward.

 

McKelvin is a classic example, if he were worth the proverbial ****, he'd have proven that prior to last season. He's failed miserably as anything but a nickel back at best, even there he's hardly among the better 3rd CBs in the league.

Not sure where you're getting that the team used a ton of resources on the pass rush last off-season and especially that the team allowed more scores. Last season, the defense allowed 40 fewer points, despite 2 minutes more in opponents' TOP. The run defense also improved from 5.0 YPC to 4.4, but it still wasn't hood enough. So they addressed it by adding Spikes and Rivers. Hopefully a(nother) complete LB is coming in the draft and ideally a slight change in scheme both defensively and offensively (scrapping the no huddle) will help the defense out. It may come at he expense of sacks, but so be it.

 

 

What a ridiculous statement. Thanks for the laugh.

The only thing I can think is that TG missed last season/thinks it's 2013.

[LB3]

 

The only thing I can think is that TG missed last season/thinks it's 2013.

 

Ahh. That makes sense. It was nice last year that the coaches knew to play to his greatest strength, press coverage.

[Kirby Jackson]

 

 

Ahh. That makes sense. It was nice last year that the coaches knew to play to his greatest strength, press coverage.

Yeah, it is really odd that he is picking on McKelvin. Last year, Leo graded out as a +8.7 and the 7th best CB in football. I know that PFF isn't the be all and end all but it gives a pretty accurate depiction of how a guy played. McKelvin has turned into a good football player.

[John from Riverside]

Well written post, no doubt about it. I think, however, that this is a classic example of over-dramatizing the effects that scheme has on productivity. Several years ago, the Ravens drafted Terrence Cody, a classic 3-4 NT if there ever was one. Well, they already had Haloti Ngata at NT so when Cody showed he could play, they made room for him and put him at DE. It's what the Ravens and Steelers have been doing forever: you put good football players on the field, it doesn't matter if it's a 3-4, 4-3, whatever. At the end of the day, 5 of the 7 starters on the Bills' front 7 are Brandon Spikes, Mario Williams, Marcell Dareus, Kyle Williams and Kiko Alonso. They are going to be good, don't worry. Not to mention, and here is the most important point of all: THEY RAN A 4-3 LAST YEAR TOO. So to suggest that Manny Lawson, who, by any account, had an excellent season last year, is going to be running around yelling, "what do I do, I forgot how to play football" because we have a new defensive coordinator, is preposterous. All that being said, I would like to think that Schwartz would come in and say, "hey you guys got a lot of sacks last year, what worked for you?"

 

What I find interesting is that a lot of people point to the Seahawks defense as being the bench mark.

 

Yet we took one of their starting DL (which we just signed to a extension) who played both DT AND DE for them

 

And supposidly the scheme will be the say as theirs.......so WHYYYY are we so afraid that we dont have the horses to run the scheme?

 

And people are way downplaying the Hughes factor. Hughes was STUCK BEHIND TWO VERY GOOD DE's with the colts.......much the same situation as with Chandler who was just stuck behind a very good TE where he was at.

 

Yet Chandler is considered more then servicable and people are worried about Hughes?

 

People need to take their Wanny voo doo dolls and flush them.....this is a new day....new players.....a very differnent young energetic in the now DC in Schwartz....it will NOT be the same as in the Wanny era.

 

What we need to worry about is getting this offense going to help our defense out!

[maryland-bills-fan]

They have shored up the linebacking corp and found a good defensive back. There are competitive players at LOG and WR. Fewer holes to have to go after in the draft.

[BigBuff423]

Not sure what your point was/is.

 

Spikes is a one-dimensional MLB as we will see this season. He's an asset vs. the run but he's equally a liability vs. the pass. In a league whereby more plays, by about then again 50% or so, plays are passing plays, we'll see how that works out for us.

 

Chandler and Corey Graham are so-so starters, everyone else is a depth caliber player on that short list.

 

Again, not sure what your point was. Mine was very simply that the team broke the bank and poured all but the sum total of its resources last season into the pass rush, which was highly successful, but the net result was the same, which the more astute NFL fans, observors, media, and analysts knew already, and the rest of the team suffered as a result, as in regressed for the most part.

 

Not to mention that at the end of the day the team allowed more scores despite that bolstered pass rush.

 

Meanwhile, fans and media look at isolated stats, aka "sacks," et. al., and for some unbeknownst and similar reasons as per above, come to the erroneous conclusions that players like A. Williams, McKelvin (who's sucked as a CB for years), Hughes, Searcy, and Lawson, and to a lesser extent Mario, are better than they actually are.

 

Buffalonians are so starving for a good team that they overlook that stuff perennially and utterly fail to be able to assess the new team going forward.

 

McKelvin is a classic example, if he were worth the proverbial ****, he'd have proven that prior to last season. He's failed miserably as anything but a nickel back at best, even there he's hardly among the better 3rd CBs in the league.

 

And by your thinking, the first thing Harbaugh would have done with the 49ers, to trade Vernon Davis, because he failed to live up to his 8th overall billing...yet, a change in scheme and HC and Coordinator has done wonders for him...oh, and Alex Smith too...and a number of others....but, hey, if the player doesn't play well in their first few seasons, then they're all washed up / never had-beens / talentless wastes of space...yup, got it!

[1B4IDie]

C. Williams is a expensive gamble, we need to get at least 2 good OL players in the draft and try to get lucky after other teams cut down.

 

"Reportedly last season Williams ranked as the lowest-rated player on the Rams roster and got graded at 74th out of 81 qualifying guards in the league. The guard got drafted with the 14th overall pick by the Chicago Bears in 2008 and never lived up to expectations. As a result got cut midway through the 2012 season."

 

http://theinscriberm...chris-williams/

Chris Williams has a very inexpensive, non guaranteed contract.

He can be cut after 2 years with very little money or risk.

 

The reports of his contract have been erroneous and exaggerated from day 1.

 

Correct contract information:

http://espn.go.com/blog/buffalo-bills/post/_/id/8050/breaking-down-chris-williams-contract

Edited April 25, 2014 by Why So Serious?