Max997 Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I agree to a point, the team has improved over the last two years and I would be shocked if he doesnt get another year but how much of the improvement is because of Marrone? Outside of hiring two good DCs what impact has he had on this team? The offense which is his area continues to regress.
Mark80 Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 If they fire Marrone I'd be pretty upset. If they don't fire Hackett I'd be pretty upset.
Wayne Cubed Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I do. As an example from yesterday my brother was counting Lee Smith's snaps and what happened when he was out there. His 1st 30 snaps were like 28 runs and 2 passes (both to him). To take it a step further why would you have an offense where Lee Smith is playing 30+ snaps? Last week in the 4th quarter they moved the football when Hackett took the lousy TEs off the field and spread it. People harp on the play calling but the whole plan is just broken. I know what they are going to do before the ball is snapped about 70% of the time and I know nothing. Imagine how predictable it is to teams that watched film all week? I'm sorry I just don't see it. And unfortunately history proves that most OC's in fact haven't gotten more out of Kyle Orton. He's playing exactly the way he's played for the past 10 years. Could the offense be more creative? Sure. Would that limit the amount of mistakes Orton now regularly makes? I don't think so. No amount of spreading the offense out with help Kyle Orton hit his receivers in stride, which he apparently can't do now. It also won't help him from checking down. He might in fact replace Trent Edwards for Captain Checkdown. Which would improve the offense more: A new OC with the same QB's on the team? OR A better QB with the same OC?
The Big Cat Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I'm sorry I just don't see it. And unfortunately history proves that most OC's in fact haven't gotten more out of Kyle Orton. He's playing exactly the way he's played for the past 10 years. Could the offense be more creative? Sure. Would that limit the amount of mistakes Orton now regularly makes? I don't think so. No amount of spreading the offense out with help Kyle Orton hit his receivers in stride, which he apparently can't do now. It also won't help him from checking down. He might in fact replace Trent Edwards for Captain Checkdown. Which would improve the offense more: A new OC with the same QB's on the team? OR A better QB with the same OC? If we subscribe to the notion that Hackett's offense is Marrone's offense and that Orton's failures are all the coaches', then how do we justify Orton putting up nearly identical numbers under McCoy and McDaniels in Denver four short years ago?
Kirby Jackson Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 You can harp on Lee Smith being in the game all you want, but until our QB stops missing wide open receivers and until our running backs stop missing clear lanes, who cares? It's a talking point you're sticking to, and you keep hammering it home as if Lee Smith in the game = inherently bad. No. It's not. The play designs and protection schemes are getting receivers open and giving the QB time, regardless of who's in the game or regardless of what packages you and/or KTD want to gripe about. EXECUTION has been terrible. And unless you expected Orton to come in here and be our franchise's savior, you should have seen it coming. We had three wide open shots at the endzone yesterday: one was an overthrow to Woods, one was a pick in a jumpball that was underthrown to Watkins and Brown cut back middle when he had a lane wide open to the outside on the broken play. You could swap Lee Smith with Roscoe !@#$ing Parish, and all of these plays would have had the exact same result. They aren't independent of one another. The design of the offense and the execution are bad. Lee Smith is a horrendous football player. When you don't have TEs that are any good you can't have 2 & 3 of them on the field all of the time. What happens is teams counter with LBs and DL instead of DBs. It becomes more difficult to run the ball when the other team is countering your inferior TEs with LBs that are better players. Now you are running behind your poor guards into 8 man fronts. Yes, if you execute you can still succeed but why would you ever put yourself in that position? The offense should be designed to do what you do well and what your opponent struggles with. If you are pounding the rock between the tackles with those TEs as you extra blockers into 8 man fronts you are definitely not playing to your strength.
The Big Cat Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 They aren't independent of one another. The design of the offense and the execution are bad. Lee Smith is a horrendous football player. When you don't have TEs that are any good you can't have 2 & 3 of them on the field all of the time. What happens is teams counter with LBs and DL instead of DBs. It becomes more difficult to run the ball when the other team is countering your inferior TEs with LBs that are better players. Now you are running behind your poor guards into 8 man fronts. Yes, if you execute you can still succeed but why would you ever put yourself in that position? The offense should be designed to do what you do well and what your opponent struggles with. If you are pounding the rock between the tackles with those TEs as you extra blockers into 8 man fronts you are definitely not playing to your strength. Sorry, but I think you have about zero credibility on this issue. I've seen you throw your tantrum about the OC, and that tells me everything I know about your level of understanding. Just being honest.
Kirby Jackson Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I'm sorry I just don't see it. And unfortunately history proves that most OC's in fact haven't gotten more out of Kyle Orton. He's playing exactly the way he's played for the past 10 years. Could the offense be more creative? Sure. Would that limit the amount of mistakes Orton now regularly makes? I don't think so. No amount of spreading the offense out with help Kyle Orton hit his receivers in stride, which he apparently can't do now. It also won't help him from checking down. He might in fact replace Trent Edwards for Captain Checkdown. Which would improve the offense more: A new OC with the same QB's on the team? OR A better QB with the same OC? I believe that both are a problem. It is much, much, much easier to find someone that can design an offense to your talent than it is to find a franchise QB. I'm not saying that I wouldn't like to see both upgraded. I would love to upgrade at QB.
The Big Cat Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 (here comes the classic "So you think this offense is great then? You don't think there's aaaaaaaaaanything wrong with it!?")
Kirby Jackson Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 Sorry, but I think you have about zero credibility on this issue. I've seen you throw your tantrum about the OC, and that tells me everything I know about your level of understanding. Just being honest. What issues that I have brought up do you have a problem with? I thought that I explained my issues pretty clearly.
KOKBILLS Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 While I'm no Marrone fan...And that much is clearly on record here...With a win vs Oakland I'm about 95% certain he'll remain...How are the Bills going to fire a HC that got them to 9-7? Especially considering the fact that they said they were going to stick to the plan...I know the Pegula's could throw a wrench in that whole plan...I just doubt they will... I think the off season plan will be to keep this D intact as much as possible...And of course to find a QB, assuming EJ is not the answer...Which is a pretty fair assumption considering the guy who forced him to the bench is clearly not good enough either...It amazes me that in this short period of time Orton's #1 problem is almost exactly what landed EJ on the bench...Accuracy and the inability to hit open WR's in stride on a semi-regular basis...Orton was doing it fairly well early on...But now he's looking like EJ 2.0...Low passes, high passes, passes behind receivers, not being able to hit the big pass in the red zone, etc, etc... I'm not a big fan of this Offense...I'm not a big fan of Marrone and especially Hackett...But I also know a top 10 QB would be a massive improvement despite Marrone/Hackett...Where that top 10 QB is going to come from is anyone's guess...
The Big Cat Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I believe that both are a problem. It is much, much, much easier to find someone that can design an offense to your talent than it is to find a franchise QB. I'm not saying that I wouldn't like to see both upgraded. I would love to upgrade at QB. Which strengths should he be calling plays for? Let's start there.
Wayne Cubed Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I believe that both are a problem. It is much, much, much easier to find someone that can design an offense to your talent than it is to find a franchise QB. I'm not saying that I wouldn't like to see both upgraded. I would love to upgrade at QB. Is It? I think most of the "better" OC's in the league have a above average QB. Gase, Bevell, etc. they have genuinely good QB's. The only outlier there is Arians and maybe Kelly. But I wouldn't exactly say Arians offense is winning games, it's their defense. Philly's offense is obviously being limited by their QB and now they are loosing games.
The Big Cat Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 While I'm no Marrone fan...And that much is clearly on record here...With a win vs Oakland I'm about 95% certain he'll remain...How are the Bills going to fire a HC that got them to 9-7? Especially considering the fact that they said they were going to stick to the plan...I know the Pegula's could throw a wrench in that whole plan...I just doubt they will... I think the off season plan will be to keep this D intact as much as possible...And of course to find a QB, assuming EJ is not the answer...Which is a pretty fair assumption considering the guy who forced him to the bench is clearly not good enough either...It amazes me that in this short period of time Orton's #1 problem is almost exactly what landed EJ on the bench...Accuracy and the inability to hit open WR's in stride on a semi-regular basis...Orton was doing it fairly well early on...But now he's looking like EJ 2.0...Low passes, high passes, passes behind receivers, not being able to hit the big pass in the red zone, etc, etc... I'm not a big fan of this Offense...I'm not a big fan of Marrone and especially Hackett...But I also know a top 10 QB would be a massive improvement despite Marrone/Hackett...Where that top 10 QB is going to come from is anyone's guess... Let's start with a top-15 QB, and I'm not convinced EJ can't be that guy. But getting a top 10 QB is a very tall order, and not getting one won't render the offseason a failure. Further, a top-15 QB wins us two of the games we dropped this year, Is It? I think most of the "better" OC's in the league have a above average QB. Gase, Bevell, etc. they have genuinely good QB's. The only outlier there is Arians and maybe Kelly. But I wouldn't exactly say Arians offense is winning games, it's their defense. Philly's offense is obviously being limited by their QB and now they are loosing games. Anyone who watched last night's game knows how incredibly mortal Kelly can be and -gasp- he punted down 11 points with less than four minutes to go.
Kirby Jackson Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 (edited) Which strengths should he be calling plays for? Let's start there. Well for starters if you want to be a running team I wouldn't want to run into 8 man fronts. I think that the TEs and guards are by far the worst positions on the team. I wouldn't have 4-5 of them on the field at a time. I think that the Bills talent lends itself to a spread, WC type of offense. They should have at least 3 WRs on the field at all times. They should run a controlled passing game with the occasional shot over the top. They will be able to run the ball much more successfully against nickel and dime defenses. I think that is basic football and common sense. What do you think that the offense should look like? Edited December 15, 2014 by Kirby Jackson
KOKBILLS Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 Let's start with a top-15 QB, and I'm not convinced EJ can't be that guy. But getting a top 10 QB is a very tall order, and not getting one won't render the offseason a failure. Further, a top-15 QB wins us two of the games we dropped this year, Fair enough...
section122 Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 They aren't independent of one another. The design of the offense and the execution are bad. Lee Smith is a horrendous football player. When you don't have TEs that are any good you can't have 2 & 3 of them on the field all of the time. What happens is teams counter with LBs and DL instead of DBs. It becomes more difficult to run the ball when the other team is countering your inferior TEs with LBs that are better players. Now you are running behind your poor guards into 8 man fronts. Yes, if you execute you can still succeed but why would you ever put yourself in that position? The offense should be designed to do what you do well and what your opponent struggles with. If you are pounding the rock between the tackles with those TEs as you extra blockers into 8 man fronts you are definitely not playing to your strength. So how do you feel about the Broncos moving to a run first offense with a top 5 all time first ballot hof qb? They don't even try to fool people as one of their tight ends is a tackle.
Casey D Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I agree.. Getting to 8 wins is an accomplishment. Give him one more year. Hack too I doubt he will coach on a one year contract. He becomes a lame duck. He will either be extended or he will go. I suspect he will be extended, and the Pegulas will pay him his contract if they need to fire him after next year. I don't think they will care about dead coach money as much as RW did.
The Big Cat Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 Well for starters if you want to be a running team I wouldn't want to run into 8 man fronts. I think that the TEs and guards are by far the worst positions on the team. I wouldn't have 4-5 of them on the field at a time. I think that the Bills talent lends itself to a spread, WC type of offense. They should have at least 3 WRs on the field at all times. They should run a controlled passing game with the occasional shot over the top. They will be able to run the ball much more successfully against nickel and dime defenses. I think that is basic football and common sense. What do you think that the offense should look like? And you think that running these sets will allow Orton to finally put the ball on open receivers? More importantly, do you think this team was wrong to move away from a run-first offense?
thebandit27 Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 I do. As an example from yesterday my brother was counting Lee Smith's snaps and what happened when he was out there. His 1st 30 snaps were like 28 runs and 2 passes (both to him). To take it a step further why would you have an offense where Lee Smith is playing 30+ snaps? Last week in the 4th quarter they moved the football when Hackett took the lousy TEs off the field and spread it. People harp on the play calling but the whole plan is just broken. I know what they are going to do before the ball is snapped about 70% of the time and I know nothing. Imagine how predictable it is to teams that watched film all week? This is a very good point...it's a fundamental problem with the offense if you're broadcasting what plays you're going to run based off of personnel packages. I'm sorry I just don't see it. And unfortunately history proves that most OC's in fact haven't gotten more out of Kyle Orton. He's playing exactly the way he's played for the past 10 years. Could the offense be more creative? Sure. Would that limit the amount of mistakes Orton now regularly makes? I don't think so. No amount of spreading the offense out with help Kyle Orton hit his receivers in stride, which he apparently can't do now. It also won't help him from checking down. He might in fact replace Trent Edwards for Captain Checkdown. Which would improve the offense more: A new OC with the same QB's on the team? OR A better QB with the same OC? I do agree with the sentiment, and as Kirby said the two ideas are, IMO, mutually exclusive. Yes, this team would be better off with the same OC and a better QB than vice-versa, no question. I still prefer better in both spots, and I think they can do that. An example of what bothers me about the offense: 1st half, GB gets themselves into a 3rd-and-short. What do they do? Spread the defense out by going to a 4-wide set and run the ball up the middle. First down. Buffalo gets in the same situation, first half, and they bring in 3 TEs, which collapses the entire defense down into the box and try to run. Stuffed for loss of two. To me, that's a lack of fundamental understanding of the game. It's not there all the time, but it's there often enough to drive me crazy.
Kirby Jackson Posted December 15, 2014 Posted December 15, 2014 So how do you feel about the Broncos moving to a run first offense with a top 5 all time first ballot hof qb? They don't even try to fool people as one of their tight ends is a tackle. I'm not sure that I understand the question? I would have no issue with the Bills being a power running team if their talent lended itself to that. If they had road grading guards then by all means pound it between the tackles. When you have guys like Spiller and Watkins and Bryce Brown they need to get the football in space.
Recommended Posts