zow2 Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Without Spiller, just not enough speed being utilized on O. They have Bryce but don't trust him much. I love Freddie but he's 4 yards and a cloud of dust, as is Dixon for the most part. Sammy is clearly going to be nursing that groin the rest of the season. He has no explosiveness right now. They should try to work Goodwin in the game like the Rams use Tavon Austin. Just get him the ball once in a while. There's ZERO speed on offense.
Kellyto83TD Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Can't be that bad, bro. Look at the scoreboard and the standings. With a name like 1972 are you saying this offense is worse than some of the all-time bad Bills teams? Thank the D and special teams for the scoreboard numbers
Zac Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Watkins was wide open numerous times yesterday. Easily identifiable single coverage and Orton wouldn't see it.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 IMHO, GB's D was not dominating Brady yesterday. Rodgers just made more clutch plays than Brady. Interesting perspective. There's no reasonable argument that Rodgers out-QB'd Brady yesterday. I especially like the little grin Rodgers puts on when he runs successfully. My perception watching the game was that Brady was being pressured on almost every throw. Just looking at the box score, there's not a strong case. They only actually sacked Brady once (though it was key). His completion percentage was a few lower than his average, which usually takes consistent pressure to achieve. Guess I'd have to go back and watch the game again - or find a site that scores QB pressures or something. GB certainly didn't neutralize Brady, for any other QB against any other team he had a good day. But I think they did make him pay for it more than other teams do. And I think they'd eat EJ alive with their stunting and changed-up looks.
mountainwampus Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Nobody mentions the lack of experienced WRs. Woods is the 1-season vet, but who is his mentor? Hogan is a lacrosse player. Most of Watkins' college receptions were near the LOS, now I don't see the greatest route running out if him. Glass Goodwin is a great sprinter, but lousy football player. Williams has the most experience being a productive WR, but he's 9th string. This WR corps needs a vet. That was how the 90's Bills always did it.
Billsfan1972 Posted December 1, 2014 Author Posted December 1, 2014 Weather was fine yesterday and absolutely no reason to have zero first half points. There was a play in the first half around midfield third down & about five where receivers are running open and he throws an uncatchable ball to a well covered Goodwin. Add to that no real throws to Watkins yet again (except where PI should have been called and the two stupid ints). Is it too much to ask for an average O?
dave mcbride Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 He's about average, imo. Good sometimes, bad sometimes. Good in some stats, bad in some stats. A voice of reason!
billsfan1959 Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Yes, I put Fitz on that list. But as far as omissions go, it's not like Orton is substantially better than Sanchez, Bortlers, Cutler and Carr. So I'd put him around the 20th best QB in the league, which is below average. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it appears you are arguing that, because he has a less than average to average QB, Hackett shouldn't be expected to put together an offensive scheme/game plan that produces anything more than less than average to average results. You also say that Orton is about the same or better than Mark Sanchez - yet Chip Kelly puts offensive schemes/game plans together with an average QB that produce top 5 results in yards and points. I am sorry, but I just do not buy this argument that if the QB is average or below average, then we shouldn't expect an offensive coordinator to put an offensive scheme in place that is anything more than what his QB is.
Billsfan1972 Posted December 1, 2014 Author Posted December 1, 2014 Watkins was wide open numerous times yesterday. Easily identifiable single coverage and Orton wouldn't see it. Saw that too. Watching Manning Sunday night is hilarious (and insightful too). He reads the defense at the LOS and makes adjustments, audibles and seems to have a handle. Outside the Gray call, every pass seemed forced.
dave mcbride Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 To be fair to Orton, who did not play well yesterday, he did make one huge play on his own. On that 4th down pass to Woods, he made a great pass on a play that was intended to be a short pass to Hogan (who was covered). It wasn't there, and he adjusted. It changed the course of the game. Of course, one can blame the scheme that results in the primary target (7-11) being easily covered on a crucial play.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 It was embarrassingly bad. Missed throws - over throws - under throws - did anyone really think Orton was the answer? He is a journeyman at best. Maybe not even as good as Fitz. Ha! That's a rhetorical question right? You know there've been threads campaigning that Orton might be our long-term Man after 1-2 respectable games. Orton is different than Fitz. Neither of them is the long-term answer.
The Big Cat Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 plenty. but if you dont think our qb can hit a pass, why are you advocating for an oc that had him throw 20 times in the first half against a weak run D? did the run run pass stuff from a few weeks ago get in his head? you can still do that sometimes. just not ALL the time. So, he's supposed to know ahead of time--after Orton completed 75% of 32 passes the game prior--that the open throws would fall incomplete? I'm sorry, are we playing to win? Or are we playing to mask our weaknesses? And if you're calling for the latter, then you have no business criticizing anything about the OC. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it appears you are arguing that, because he has a less than average to average QB, Hackett shouldn't be expected to put together an offensive scheme/game plan that produces anything more than less than average to average results. You also say that Orton is about the same or better than Mark Sanchez - yet Chip Kelly puts offensive schemes/game plans together with an average QB that produce top 5 results in yards and points. I am sorry, but I just do not buy this argument that if the QB is average or below average, then we shouldn't expect an offensive coordinator to put an offensive scheme in place that is anything more than what his QB is. There's nothing to correct. I'll gladly say: Nate Hackett is no Chip Kelley. Was anyone disputing otherwise?
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Please correct me if I am wrong, but it appears you are arguing that, because he has a less than average to average QB, Hackett shouldn't be expected to put together an offensive scheme/game plan that produces anything more than less than average to average results. You also say that Orton is about the same or better than Mark Sanchez - yet Chip Kelly puts offensive schemes/game plans together with an average QB that produce top 5 results in yards and points. I am sorry, but I just do not buy this argument that if the QB is average or below average, then we shouldn't expect an offensive coordinator to put an offensive scheme in place that is anything more than what his QB is. I agree -- it's kind of got to be one or the other, or that Sanchez is actually better. I actually think that Sanchez is a bit better, but in a terrific system that plays to his strengths. And I think even the most ardent Hackett defender would admit that Kelly is about two tiers above.
GG Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Well, I've already identified 19 quarterbacks whose OC's have a lot more success putting the ball in his hands, or, as is probably more likely the case, never face the problem of having opposing defenses prefer they pass the ball. So I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. The point I'm trying to make is that the professional defensive coordinators are a step ahead of Hackett and Marrone. It's not a simple ratio of how many times they pass vs run. It's all about the game plan and personnel groupings. Of course I don't expect the Bills to run into a brick wall of 8 men stacked in the box. But I also want the OC to be a little more inventive in his design than to run Sammy and Woods wide, with Hogan in the slot. That is the stock Bills formation for the pass. Watch the first couple of series yesterday. It's infuriating. There are many ways to use the pass to take the pressure of a stacked line. But not pass plays that take way too long to set up. It's also changing your personnel groupings. You won't win too many games with the Bills offensive play design. You don't trot Goodwin for his token fly route. You don't bury Big Mike in the inactive list. You won't win by having Hogan as the No. 3 ahead of Williams and Goodwin. Or if you have him as No. 3, you also have the other guys on the field. Bills offense goes into a game with one hand tied behind its back because Hackett & Marrone don't utilize their players to their best abilities and in the process play right into the hands of professionals.
Freddie's Dead Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 And yet, at halftime, Fred had 5 carries and Orton had 18 pass attempts... Vs the browns and their 29th ranked run defense, 8th ranked pass D.. Nice gameplan fellas. Attack their strength. Same shiite, different day. Wake up Nate. This. No better indictment of Hack-it Challenge than those stats right there. I lost my voice screaming at the TV. I have no problem questioning the ratio. I'm willing to bet that once the all-22's come out, we'll see 10 Browns defenders in the box the whole time, though. There were a lot of times they only had 5 or 6 in the box, then Nate Hackett would motion Woods of Hogan INTO the formation to bring another defender into the box (are you f'ing kidding me Nate?). Hack-It creating one of those challenges he likes so much.
peterpan Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Wow there are a lot of Hackett defenders out here today. And I thought this was one of his worst games. His formations suck. Right off the batt our formations put us at a disadvantage. Hackett calls isolation routes vrs man coverage on the crowded side of the field with 3 wrs running routes. NO that's when you put ONE guy over there and get him some room to work. That int in te end zone was an easy TD if the formation was simply flipped with Sammy on the wide side of the field and not into the boundary. Outside one one or two goalie formations I don't think orton was under center untill 4 mins left in te 3rd quarter. What does he think this is??? Running out of the shotgun hasn't worked all year. And we keep doing it on third and short WTF! How can anyone defend Hackett after this game? He had maybe three good play calls in likely 60 offensive plays
NoSaint Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 So, he's supposed to know ahead of time--after Orton completed 75% of 32 passes the game prior--that the open throws would fall incomplete? I'm sorry, are we playing to win? Or are we playing to mask our weaknesses? And if you're calling for the latter, then you have no business criticizing anything about the OC. how about playing to exploit our opponents weaknesses too? and coming up with a gameplan that uses our strengths to do so? if the passing game is a weakness, then sure, lets not lean on orton heavily against a team with a bad run D, and pick our shots instead of forcing it.
stevewin Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 To me the play calling is one issue, but even more fundamental is the whole design of the offense and plays themselves. There's rarely any motion, or misdirection (I'm not talking about a double reverse flea flicker - just a simple counter play for god's sake). How many times do you see other teams in third and short just complete that short slant over the middle, like candy from a baby. Or just fake a simple handoff with the play streaming one way, then hit someone on the other side. We rarely (if ever) see any of this. The design of so many plays are so unimaginative and sometimes counterintuitive even. Examples from yesterday that have been mentioned - motioning a receiver to the side of the field you are trying to 'isolate' another receiver on? Having a WR go in motion only to stop at the line to block for a running play (and bring the person covering him into the box)? WTF? These go beyond stupid gameplanning or playcalling, rather it's a stupid play (created/installed by the OC) to begin with. And these simple quick hitting plays do not require All-pro QB or RG to execute. The third and short fails kill me the most. People want to blame Pears - but if he is so bad don't friggin run over him! If the whole OL is incapable of ever getting a single yard when you need it with the plays you are running, figure out a way to do something different to help push the pile and get a friggin yard.
BmarvB Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 Even Chan Gailey could do better as OC with this offense. Granted they're winning but it's despite having Hackett as OC. Offer him the open UB coaching job. he's better suited for the college level right now, and with 2 years experience in the NFL, he might be a good fit for the Bulls.
chris heff Posted December 1, 2014 Posted December 1, 2014 EJ was definitely not doing well in his last two games. But the O 'looks' better with some throws and catches but the production has not markedly increased. We are kind of stuck right now with the two and the coaches have to decide who is less bad. Make no mistake, the first half of yesterday's game was close to rock bottom for the Bills O this season. The phenomenal catch by Woods changed the game. Woods should get yesterday's game ball. Manuel and Orton have the same issues. Inability to see open receiver, inaccurate and can't produce in the red zone. Is it on them or Hackett?
Recommended Posts