A Few Thoughts About The Game, in no particular order.....

[GunnerBill]

First of all I am not talking about Schwartz as a Head Coach and whilst it is true that they were largely running his defense in Detroit, Gunter Cunningham was calling the plays. To even begin to compare Schwartz to Wannstedt is ludicrous to my mind. We still lead the NFL in sacks for goodness sake. Wannstedt didn't jsut rush 4 - he called the same rush pretty much every play. Schwartz's scheme is a lot more complex than that, they are using Mario in different ways and the scheme is freeing big Dareus up nicely to get to the QB on a regular basis.

 

If the question is did Schwartz call a perfect game against New England I would guess that even he would say no. But he is getting superb results with this Bills team to my mind. But I think too many fans believe more pressure on the Quarterback is the answer to everything and I am not sure it is. As has already been pointed out, for example, the stats suggest Bridgewater did better when faced with the blitz than when the Bills just rushed four.

 

Sometimes your opponents will make plays - welcome to the NFL. It is parity. Every team has some talent on the offensive side of the ball, even the likes of the Jags and the Raiders and sometimes the right play call will result in giving up yardage just because a talented guys makes a good catch or breaks 3 tackles for a big run. So you have to park individual play calls and look at the overall results of the defense.

 

As for being 27th agaisnt the pass - I think that is an old number and we are ranked higher against the pass after this week. In addition, because our run D is 4th in the NFL and joint first in YPA allowing just 3.2 per rushing attempt teams are being forced to throw against us. In terms of passing yards per attempt given up we are 19th. Can that get better? Sure. Is it disastrous? No... and it is contributing to a defence that is 8th overall in points per game allowed, 1st in sacks as mentioned above, joint 3rd in interceptions, and 4th in getting off the field on 3rd down.

 

This defense is for real. I know a lot of fans prefer to watch the exciting blitzing style but I can only presume the criticism of Schwartz by those fans is, at least in part, ideological. Because he is getting results and the defense is consistently giving a spluttering offense the chance to win games.

[PolishDave]

First of all I am not talking about Schwartz as a Head Coach and whilst it is true that they were largely running his defense in Detroit, Gunter Cunningham was calling the plays. To even begin to compare Schwartz to Wannstedt is ludicrous to my mind. We still lead the NFL in sacks for goodness sake. Wannstedt didn't jsut rush 4 - he called the same rush pretty much every play. Schwartz's scheme is a lot more complex than that, they are using Mario in different ways and the scheme is freeing big Dareus up nicely to get to the QB on a regular basis.

Schwartz's scheme isn't why Dareus is playing well. Dareus is double teamed most of the time and still making plays. It isn't because of some awesome scheme they are putting him in. It is because Dareus is having the type of year he showed potential to have way back when he was in college.

 

If the question is did Schwartz call a perfect game against New England I would guess that even he would say no. But he is getting superb results with this Bills team to my mind. But I think too many fans believe more pressure on the Quarterback is the answer to everything and I am not sure it is. As has already been pointed out, for example, the stats suggest Bridgewater did better when faced with the blitz than when the Bills just rushed four.

You mention the New England game in one sentence and in the very next sentence say that Schwartz is getting superb results. I think you forgot how the Patriots could have sent their punter on a beer run during the entire second half of the Bills game.

 

As the Patriots and Charges games showed, this Bills team will get destroyed by a good quarterback, which in my opinion is because Schwartz doesn't bring enough pressure on them especially in obvious passing situations.

 

Quarterback pressure isn't the answer to everything, but it is the answer to beating teams with elite quarterbacks. You have to get them to throw the ball earlier than they want to. You can't let them sit back and take their time.

 

Unless Schwartz finds a way to get pressure on good quarterbacks, the Bills will be incapable of beating a playoff caliber team. And they won't be able to win the AFC East.

[The Underdog]

I think I'm just starting to come back to earth after that big win... Its crazy the emotion of thinking the season (playoff hopes) is basically over to 1 minute later celebrating a dramatic win.

It is so fun to have a rookie receiver like Sammy that can dominate the game. Orton is a great pure passer, its great to think about about good he can be if we can protect him for even just a second or two longer. Our D line DOMINATES.

 

Exciting season so far, lets go into the Meadowlands and win a tough divisional game and grab a top 6 AFC spot by the throat. Go Bills!

[GunnerBill]

As the Patriots and Charges games showed, this Bills team will get destroyed by a good quarterback, which in my opinion is because Schwartz doesn't bring enough pressure on them especially in obvious passing situations.

 

Quarterback pressure isn't the answer to everything, but it is the answer to beating teams with elite quarterbacks. You have to get them to throw the ball earlier than they want to. You can't let them sit back and take their time.

 

I don't think it is as simple as that. As I said, Pettine tried blitzing Brady on 3rd and long in the final drive last year in the home opener and he still found his man. The key to beating the top Quarterbacks is not just sending more and more pressure. What makes these guys the best is that they diagnose what they are seein quickly. You send more pressure and are predictable in doing it they will find safety valves and you will be exposed at the second level. The way you beat the top guys is confuse them. That is what the Chiefs for example did to Brady. He didn't know what he was looking at and that is why he made mistakes. They weren't blitzing constantly.

[PolishDave]

I don't think it is as simple as that. As I said, Pettine tried blitzing Brady on 3rd and long in the final drive last year in the home opener and he still found his man. The key to beating the top Quarterbacks is not just sending more and more pressure. What makes these guys the best is that they diagnose what they are seein quickly. You send more pressure and are predictable in doing it they will find safety valves and you will be exposed at the second level. The way you beat the top guys is confuse them. That is what the Chiefs for example did to Brady. He didn't know what he was looking at and that is why he made mistakes. They weren't blitzing constantly.

I agree with you for the most part except when in 3rd and long passing situations. I say you blitz in that situation every time, changing the way in which you do it each time. Schwartz usually won't blitz even in that situation. He will let Brady sit back and wait for a man to come open.

 

Also, if you don't let guys like Brady take their time, then you take away the number of opportunities they have to throw the long ball. And those long balls result in big plays for them a lot of the time between completions and drawn flags.

 

I say, bring more pressure, make them execute short passes under duress.

[Maddog69]

Schwartz continues to piss me off with the 3 man rushes.

 

I thought it was going to cost us the game on that 3rd and 18 for that 25 plus pass play.

 

That play really ticked me off. We were sitting there watching the safeties line up literally 21 yards off the line of scrimmage and backing up at the snap. The Bills gave them that first down.

[GunnerBill]

I agree with you for the most part except when in 3rd and long passing situations. I say you blitz in that situation every time, changing the way in which you do it each time. Schwartz usually won't blitz even in that situation. He will let Brady sit back and wait for a man to come open.

 

Also, if you don't let guys like Brady take their time, then you take away the number of opportunities they have to throw the long ball. And those long balls result in big plays for them a lot of the time between completions and drawn flags.

 

I say, bring more pressure, make them execute short passes under duress.

 

The one area that the Patriots have actually had difficulty this year is with completing deep passes whether or not Brady has been pressured. So again you look at tendencies and success rates in putting together your game plan. I said above I doubt Schwartz thinks he called the perfect game against New England, but I think he called a pretty good one against San Diego actually - the offense was to blame for that loss.

[Spiderweb]

Nice job, as usual Bill.

 

My thoughts. I gave Marrone and Hackett the benefit of the doubt for all of last year, and for the first four or so games this year, because there were plays to be made that were not made by the players. The last three games they both sucked terribly. It's inexcusable for them to be doing the things they are doing with the players we have. They are ruining this offense, despite the win.

 

The defense was frustrating for sure, but they did what they had to do, gave up 17 points when we had 4-5 turnovers and a crappy offense. I will give them a pass because we won. Terrible tackling though, far too many third and longs given up.

 

Hughes and Dareus were monsters. I think we have to re-sign Hughes despite the money devoted to the rest of the DL.

 

Bradham is going to be a very good player.

 

Chandler made up for his drop but that was a helluva pass.

 

We're going to have to live with Orton. The difference of being a veteran is easily seen but he is just terrible under a strong rush. I place a lot of that blame however on Hackett and Marrone for several reasons. He made the plays when we needed him to though.

 

I've said it a hundred times but this is 101. This is why you make the Watkins trade. He's a star. If anything he's being under-used.

 

Lee Smith should not be on the field. Hogan made a huge play but he shouldn't be playing either.

On board 100% with keeping Lee Smith off the field, but why stop there. How about off the team and out of Buffalo? As for Hogan, I disagree as strongly. He's the type of player every team needs. Selfless, hardworking, willing and able to do some dirty work on ST, pretty good hands, good routes.......and he has decent size. He's the kind of player who only gets better the more he's used.

 

Lee Smith is playing because the O line is so bad. If the line could do its job we'd be seeing a lot more of Gragg. And why shouldn't Hogan be playing? He's really emerged since Orton took over -- quite frankly, he's doing Robert Woods's job better than Woods.

Woods is being mis-used terribly by Hacket and Marone. Watkins and then Woods are our best receivers. Give Woods a route instead of two yard slants and dumps that may get him killed.

 

It was a frustrating win, but nonetheless a win

 

- Our OC is ridicules, just so predictably wrong on so many things . . . one back, run him to death, just stupid

 

- Even though Orton throws picks, I still like his moxy, and in two of three games he has pulled it out when it was do-or-die

 

- I saw EJ as well, and I was very proud of him. He'll be back.

 

- Have we seen our last CJ Spiller run as a Buffalo Bill? And fittingly, after frustrating us all year, he finally bounces one outside and it is his longest run of the year.

 

- Chandler looks like a different player with a Professional QB throwing his way.

 

- Hogan has replaced Mike Williams, and I'm not sure Williams was that bad, but Hogan just continues to improve.

 

- Well Bryce Brown, now we'll see what you have

 

- If we can cut down on the turnovers, we can compete for the division crown

 

- Did Urbik do something to Marrone's wife?

One back and run him to death? What about his conditioning. For crying out loud, what did Dixon have but 12-13 carries? Sorry but Dixon claims he wants to be the guy, well being dead on your feet after 10 carries isn't going to get the job done. I like Dixon, but......

[billykaykay]

Slot guys need to have that combination of athleticism and toughness or to fight off being jammed at the line. So far that's what I like about Hogan. He's got enough size and strength (I don't think Woods does) to get into those seams, and enough athleticism to turn it up field every now and then. Not saying he's great, but a reliable slot guy is critical, particularly with a struggling run game.

Hogan is better than most of us thought. The coaches to their credit saw this early. He is big, strong, & FAST - very fast. Did I forget - he has good hands.

[thewildrabbit]

First of all I am not talking about Schwartz as a Head Coach and whilst it is true that they were largely running his defense in Detroit, Gunter Cunningham was calling the plays. To even begin to compare Schwartz to Wannstedt is ludicrous to my mind. We still lead the NFL in sacks for goodness sake. Wannstedt didn't jsut rush 4 - he called the same rush pretty much every play. Schwartz's scheme is a lot more complex than that, they are using Mario in different ways and the scheme is freeing big Dareus up nicely to get to the QB on a regular basis.

 

If the question is did Schwartz call a perfect game against New England I would guess that even he would say no. But he is getting superb results with this Bills team to my mind. But I think too many fans believe more pressure on the Quarterback is the answer to everything and I am not sure it is. As has already been pointed out, for example, the stats suggest Bridgewater did better when faced with the blitz than when the Bills just rushed four.

 

Sometimes your opponents will make plays - welcome to the NFL. It is parity. Every team has some talent on the offensive side of the ball, even the likes of the Jags and the Raiders and sometimes the right play call will result in giving up yardage just because a talented guys makes a good catch or breaks 3 tackles for a big run. So you have to park individual play calls and look at the overall results of the defense.

 

As for being 27th agaisnt the pass - I think that is an old number and we are ranked higher against the pass after this week. In addition, because our run D is 4th in the NFL and joint first in YPA allowing just 3.2 per rushing attempt teams are being forced to throw against us. In terms of passing yards per attempt given up we are 19th. Can that get better? Sure. Is it disastrous? No... and it is contributing to a defence that is 8th overall in points per game allowed, 1st in sacks as mentioned above, joint 3rd in interceptions, and 4th in getting off the field on 3rd down.

 

This defense is for real. I know a lot of fans prefer to watch the exciting blitzing style but I can only presume the criticism of Schwartz by those fans is, at least in part, ideological. Because he is getting results and the defense is consistently giving a spluttering offense the chance to win games.

The Lions ran Schwartz's "wide 9" defense in Detroit in 2013, and with not so great results, as they were 15th in points allowed, 16th in yards allowed. Now with basically the exact same players the Lions this year are #2 in points allowed, #1 in yards allowed. This year the Lions are in 4th place for sacks, and tied for 3rd with Buffalo in INT's. Quite a drastic improvement from what I see as last year the Lions were 28th in sacks with 33, 17th in INTs with 15.

 

This year the Bills are currently 11th in total defense, 19th in pass defense, 11th in run defense. #1 in sacks with 24, #3 in INTs, #2 in tackles.

 

The funny thing is that this year the Bills sack leader is Marcel Dareus with 7 sacks, Hughes & Williams each with 5. Last year it was Super Mario with 13, Kyle Williams with 10.5, Jerry Hughes with 10.0, Marcel Dareus with 7.5. So, it wasn't like Pettine was sending a LBer, Safety every other play.

 

 

The frustration I am talking about was so clearly evident against Houston in letting Ryan Fitzpatrick back into the game in the second half by not getting enough pressure on him. The same can be said against the Chargers, and even more so against the Patriots in knowing their O line was very suspect. We all saw what Brady looked like at KC & Miami when he was rattled, and under a lot of pressure. While Mario & Hughes did each manage a sack on Brady I think most of us were expecting to see a rush like the one the Patriots had for Orton, and the 5 sacks on him.

 

2 sacks against Chicago*

4 sacks against Miami*

2 sacks against San Diego

3 sacks against Houston

6 sacks against Detroit*

2 sacks against New England

5 sacks against Minnesota*

 

The teams with an asterisk are wins, and you can see a direct correlation that wins seem to come with more sacks. Besides that Schwartz had absolutely no answer for TE Rob Gronkowski, so he had coverage's slide to cover Gronk,and because of that Brady was able to light up the bills D with 4 TD's to other receivers. Those other receivers were the unexpected kind to the 2nd string & 4th string WR's, 3rd string TE.

 

Bottom line: I know I would like to see more pressure on the QB then rushing just the front four all game, and when those front four don't get to the QB the result is the secondary getting ripped a new one. The Bills might have two top 11 draft picks at CB, but they don't play like it at times. I loved Schwartz the first few games, and now I like him less, and less after watching QB's getting so much time in the pocket to complete passes. I shudder to think what Peyton Manning is going to do to Buffalo in Denver.

 

Schwartz's scheme isn't why Dareus is playing well. Dareus is double teamed most of the time and still making plays. It isn't because of some awesome scheme they are putting him in. It is because Dareus is having the type of year he showed potential to have way back when he was in college.

 

You mention the New England game in one sentence and in the very next sentence say that Schwartz is getting superb results. I think you forgot how the Patriots could have sent their punter on a beer run during the entire second half of the Bills game.

 

As the Patriots and Charges games showed, this Bills team will get destroyed by a good quarterback, which in my opinion is because Schwartz doesn't bring enough pressure on them especially in obvious passing situations.

 

Quarterback pressure isn't the answer to everything, but it is the answer to beating teams with elite quarterbacks. You have to get them to throw the ball earlier than they want to. You can't let them sit back and take their time.

 

Unless Schwartz finds a way to get pressure on good quarterbacks, the Bills will be incapable of beating a playoff caliber team. And they won't be able to win the AFC East.

What he said.

[FireChan]

On board 100% with keeping Lee Smith off the field, but why stop there. How about off the team and out of Buffalo? As for Hogan, I disagree as strongly. He's the type of player every team needs. Selfless, hardworking, willing and able to do some dirty work on ST, pretty good hands, good routes.......and he has decent size. He's the kind of player who only gets better the more he's used.

 

 

Woods is being mis-used terribly by Hacket and Marone. Watkins and then Woods are our best receivers. Give Woods a route instead of two yard slants and dumps that may get him killed.

 

 

One back and run him to death? What about his conditioning. For crying out loud, what did Dixon have but 12-13 carries? Sorry but Dixon claims he wants to be the guy, well being dead on your feet after 10 carries isn't going to get the job done. I like Dixon, but......

 

I tend to agree with this. Dixon was running effectively. It's not like he got 10 carries in a row, it was like 4-5 then one passing play where he split out. He's not the 33 year old or the constantly winded CJ. I bet he's on the treadmill all week.

[Kelly the Dog]

I tend to agree with this. Dixon was running effectively. It's not like he got 10 carries in a row, it was like 4-5 then one passing play where he split out. He's not the 33 year old or the constantly winded CJ. I bet he's on the treadmill all week.

I forgot the play but he looked exhausted one time trying to pass block after carrying a couple times in a row.

[FireChan]

 

I forgot the play but he looked exhausted one time trying to pass block after carrying a couple times in a row.

 

I'm sure he did. But you know, he claimed SF never gave him a fair shot, and he was too gassed to play 5 snaps in the second half after only playing ST in the first? That's kinda weak, no?

[Kelly the Dog]

I'm sure he did. But you know, he claimed SF never gave him a fair shot, and he was too gassed to play 5 snaps in the second half after only playing ST in the first? That's kinda weak, no?

It is. You hear it all the time about "being in football shape" or "game shape" in the NHL or NBA. It's hard to simulate the battering your body gets. But yeah, that shouldn't be the case for a guy who plays a lot of ST and knows he has to be ready should injuries occur. He was also in the game plan before the injuries I think.

[FireChan]

 

It is. You hear it all the time about "being in football shape" or "game shape" in the NHL or NBA. It's hard to simulate the battering your body gets. But yeah, that shouldn't be the case for a guy who plays a lot of ST and knows he has to be ready should injuries occur. He was also in the game plan before the injuries I think.

 

I bet St. Doug was not happy.

[Orton's Arm]

First of all I am not talking about Schwartz as a Head Coach and whilst it is true that they were largely running his defense in Detroit, Gunter Cunningham was calling the plays. To even begin to compare Schwartz to Wannstedt is ludicrous to my mind. We still lead the NFL in sacks for goodness sake. Wannstedt didn't jsut rush 4 - he called the same rush pretty much every play. Schwartz's scheme is a lot more complex than that, they are using Mario in different ways and the scheme is freeing big Dareus up nicely to get to the QB on a regular basis.

 

If the question is did Schwartz call a perfect game against New England I would guess that even he would say no. But he is getting superb results with this Bills team to my mind. But I think too many fans believe more pressure on the Quarterback is the answer to everything and I am not sure it is. As has already been pointed out, for example, the stats suggest Bridgewater did better when faced with the blitz than when the Bills just rushed four.

 

Sometimes your opponents will make plays - welcome to the NFL. It is parity. Every team has some talent on the offensive side of the ball, even the likes of the Jags and the Raiders and sometimes the right play call will result in giving up yardage just because a talented guys makes a good catch or breaks 3 tackles for a big run. So you have to park individual play calls and look at the overall results of the defense.

 

As for being 27th agaisnt the pass - I think that is an old number and we are ranked higher against the pass after this week. In addition, because our run D is 4th in the NFL and joint first in YPA allowing just 3.2 per rushing attempt teams are being forced to throw against us. In terms of passing yards per attempt given up we are 19th. Can that get better? Sure. Is it disastrous? No... and it is contributing to a defence that is 8th overall in points per game allowed, 1st in sacks as mentioned above, joint 3rd in interceptions, and 4th in getting off the field on 3rd down.

 

This defense is for real. I know a lot of fans prefer to watch the exciting blitzing style but I can only presume the criticism of Schwartz by those fans is, at least in part, ideological. Because he is getting results and the defense is consistently giving a spluttering offense the chance to win games.

 

> In terms of passing yards per attempt given up we are 19th.

 

Passing yards per attempt is the right stat to use. 19th place is a little below average. Pass defense is about three to four times as important as run defense. (By this I mean that according to a regression analysis by the New York Times, a 1 SD improvement in pass defense will produce three to four times as large an improvement in winning percentage as would a 1 SD improvement in run defense.)

 

I agree that blitzing more on passing downs isn't always the answer. Brady thrives on getting rid of the ball quickly. First and foremost, the defense needs to take away his ability to go to his quick reads, even if it means dropping seven or eight guys into coverage. I agree with you that the key to stopping the Patriots' offensive juggernaut is to confuse Brady and take away his targets. That was Schwartz's job--a job at which he utterly failed in the second half of the Patriots game.

 

Schwartz needs to do a much, much better job than that against other good passing teams. Otherwise, this defense will be like the Gregggg Williams/Jerry Gray defense we once had: awesome at beating up weak offenses, but relatively worthless against teams like the Patriots.

[GunnerBill]

I have said repeatedly he didn't call a great game against the Patriots.... but I don't think that is because he didn't blitz every 3rd down and nor do I think it undermines what has been a very solid first (almost) half a season in the DC role. He is the best coaching hire this team has made in a very long time to my mind and I think the numbers back that up. Anyone who thinks we would have have 4 wins if this defense had been operating (both in design and execution) anything other than very well is deluding themselves.

 

EDIT: none of which means there isn't still room for improvement!

Edited October 23, 2014 by GunnerBill

[Orton's Arm]

I have said repeatedly he didn't call a great game against the Patriots.... but I don't think that is because he didn't blitz every 3rd down and nor do I think it undermines what has been a very solid first (almost) half a season in the DC role. He is the best coaching hire this team has made in a very long time to my mind and I think the numbers back that up. Anyone who thinks we would have have 4 wins if this defense had been operating (both in design and execution) anything other than very well is deluding themselves.

 

EDIT: none of which means there isn't still room for improvement!

 

> I have said repeatedly he didn't call a great game against the Patriots.... but I don't think that is because he didn't blitz every 3rd down

 

On this we agree. (More below.)

 

> nor do I think it undermines what has been a very solid first (almost) half a season in the DC role.

 

The litmus test for this defense isn't how it looks against struggling offenses, such as the Dolphins or Lions or Vikings. Its litmus test is how it looks against teams with good passing attacks, like the Chargers or the Patriots. The Bills' defense hasn't faced many offenses like that thus far this season. The (relatively rare) games against teams with good passing offenses constitute far more meaningful indicators of where this defense stands than do games against the likes of Tannehill.

 

The fact the defense--including the defensive coaching staff--did poorly against the Patriots doesn't mean we should expect equally poor performance every time we face a good passing offense. We haven't yet faced enough good passing offenses to know what kind of pattern to expect from Schwartz.

 

During the Patriots-Giants Super Bowls, the Giants revealed a very good method of stopping Brady and the Patriots' passing attack. They'd rush three guys, while dropping eight back into coverage. Those guys would play tight coverage. It's not like they were denying Brady the 20 yard route while letting him have the five yard route. No. They were denying him the 20 yard route and the five yard route. A defense like that was akin to throwing a thick, soaking wet blanket over a campfire. It smothered the Patriots' offense.

 

Against the Patriots, the Bills defense wasn't like that at all. There wasn't much blitzing, so in that sense the philosophy was similar to that employed by the Giants. But the Bills' defenders were handing out larger cushions than a Brobdingnagian sofa factory. If you only rush three or four guys, and make little effort to deny the offense shorter passing opportunities, you basically have a prevent defense. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any defense which would be worse to use against the Patriots than that.

[PolishDave]

During the Patriots-Giants Super Bowls, the Giants revealed a very good method of stopping Brady and the Patriots' passing attack. They'd rush three guys, while dropping eight back into coverage. Those guys would play tight coverage. It's not like they were denying Brady the 20 yard route while letting him have the five yard route. No. They were denying him the 20 yard route and the five yard route. A defense like that was akin to throwing a thick, soaking wet blanket over a campfire. It smothered the Patriots' offense.

 

I think your memory of that Superbowl might be a bit off the mark. The Giants did blitz Brady. They pressured him often throughout the game and sacked him 5 times. You don't sack Brady 5 times in a game rushing 3 guys all the time, especially that year.

[GunnerBill]

They pressured him a lot but my memory is they got it done with their front 4 a lot. I think there is a place for blitzing Brady but I think you have to use them against him sparingly and intelligently. The intention should always be to confuse him. As Orton's Arm identifies if Brady knows you are going to be blitzing and he is picking them up he gets the ball out quickly and his safety valves hurt you at the second level - be that his slot guy, be it his running backs or be it his tight ends.

 

I think wehave played 2 very good offences so far. I thought Schwartz did a decent job vs San Diego and a less good job vs New England. But in the recent past our defense has been susceptible against anyone.... good or bad. Don't tell me you have forgotten us making Brandon Wheedon look somewhat competent on TNF last season?